    [Senate Hearing 119-325]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                          S. Hrg. 119-325

                    THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR. MATTHEW L.
                   LOHMEIER TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF AIR
                   FORCE; MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH TO BE
                   DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
                   INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; AND MR.
                   DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN TO BE ASSISTANT
                   SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL
                   SECURITY AFFAIRS
    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                  BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 1, 2025

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                     Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    63-041 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2026
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

      ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi,
                 Chairman
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
    TOM COTTON, Arkansas
    MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
    JONI ERNST, Iowa
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    RICK SCOTT, Florida
    TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
    MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    TED BUDD, North Carolina
    ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri
    JIM BANKS, Indiana
    TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JACK REED, Rhode Island
                                         JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
                                         KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
                                         RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
                                         MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
                                         TIM KAINE, Virginia
                                         ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
                                         ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
                                         GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
                                         TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
                                         JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
                                         MARK KELLY, Arizona
                                         ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan

       John P. Keast, Staff Director
    Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff
                 Director

                                      (ii)

                             C O N T E N T S

    _________________________________________________________________

                                  may 1, 2025

                                                                       Page
    The Nominations of: Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier to be Under Secretary     1
      of Air Force; Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh to be Deputy Under
      Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security; and Mr.
      Daniel L. Zimmerman to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for
      International Security Affairs.

                               Members Statements

    Wicker, Senator Roger F..........................................     1

    Reed, Senator Jack...............................................     2

                               Witness Statements

    Hagerty, Senator Bill............................................     4

    Lohmeier, Mr. Matthew L., to be Under Secretary of Air Force.....     5

      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    48

      Questions for the Record.......................................    72

      Nomination Reference and Report................................    91

      Biographical Sketch............................................    92

      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................    94

      Signature Page.................................................    99

    Overbaugh, Mr. Justin P., to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense     8
      for Intelligence and Security.

      Advance Policy Questions.......................................    99

      Questions for the Record.......................................   120

      Nomination Reference and Report................................   132

      Biographical Sketch............................................   133

      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   137

      Signature Page.................................................   143

    Zimmerman, Mr. Daniel L., to be Assistant Secretary of Defense       10
      for International Security Affairs.

      Advance Policy Questions.......................................   143

      Questions for the Record.......................................   156

      Nomination Reference and Report................................   169

      Biographical Sketch............................................   170

      Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire......................   171

      Signature Page.................................................   176

                                     (iii)

                  This hearing is printed to include all available
                    information
                    requested or required to be inserted for the
                    record.

                                      (iv)

     THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR. MATTHEW L. LOHMEIER TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF
      AIR FORCE; MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH TO BE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF
     DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; AND MR. DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN TO
                                       BE
       ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2025

                                  United States Senate,
                                   Committee on Armed Services,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:39 a.m. in room
    SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Roger Wicker
    (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
        Committee Members present: Senators Wicker, Fischer,
    Cotton, Ernst, Sullivan, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd,
    Schmitt, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono,
    Kaine, King, Duckworth, and Kelly.
        Also present: Senator Hagerty.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROGER F. WICKER

        Chairman Wicker. I thank our witnesses for being here. We
    have a familiar face at the desk also, and I welcome all the
    families of our witnesses and thank them for being here this
    morning.
        As I've said many times, we face an axis of aggressors that
    deepen their cooperation every day. A new cooperative
    engagement between our enemies strengthens every day. We need
    qualified people who are willing to step up and serve during
    these dangerous times.
        Matthew Lohmeier has served our country as an Active Duty
    officer in the Air Force and Space Force. Based on his
    experience in uniform, he's been an outspoken proponent of
    eliminating the divisive DEI [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion]
    agenda that was the hallmark of the Department of Defense in
    the earlier Administration. Fortunately, President Trump and
    Secretary Hegseth have done much toward removing DEI at DOD.
        Mr. Lohmeier's nomination for Under Secretary of the Air
    Force represents an opportunity to evaluate closely the kind of
    leadership we need in the Air Force and Space Force at this
    pivotal moment. This role requires a steady, unifying presence,
    and needs someone who can work across the department to advance
    readiness, morale, and mission focus. I look forward to hearing
    how Mr. Lohmeier intends to be that needed presence.
        Mr. Justin Overbaugh has been nominated to be the Deputy
    Under Secretary of Defense for intelligence and Security. In
    this role, he would serve as the principal assistant to the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security,
    overseeing the intelligence, counterintelligence, security, and
    law enforcement functions of the DOD.
        Mr. Overbaugh's deep experience as an Army officer in the
    fields of intelligence and special operations make him ideal
    for a candidate of this position. I look forward to hearing his
    priorities for ensuring our defense intelligence enterprise is
    best postured to provide timely and accurate intelligence to
    our warfighters, safeguard DOD sensitive information from our
    adversaries, and inform our acquisitions and investments.
        Mr. Daniel Zimmerman has been nominated to be the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. In
    this role, he would serve as the principal advisor to the Under
    Secretary of Defense for Policy and the lead policy advisor to
    all matters related to Europe, NATO, and Russia.
        Mr. Zimmerman will have responsibility for managing the
    NATO alliance, encountering Russian aggression and malign
    activities. His background as an intelligence officer and his
    experience working in Congress make him an ideal candidate for
    this position. I look forward to hearing his priorities, and
    how he plans to revitalize the NATO alliance, and develop
    initiatives to counter Russian aggression.
        With that, I turn to my friend and colleague, Ranking
    Member Reed.

                     STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED

        Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Want
    to recognize Mr. Lohmeier, Mr. Overbaugh, and Mr. Zimmerman,
    and also our colleague Senator Bill Hagerty. We also want to
    recognize the families that are here today.
        Now, Mr. Lohmeier, you've been nominated to be the Under
    Secretary for the Department of the Air Force. If confirmed,
    you would run the day-to-day operations of the Department of
    the Air Force and assist the Secretary in leading the largest
    fleet of aircraft and space assets in the world. Most
    importantly, you would be responsible for managing the hundreds
    of thousands of men and women who make up the Air Force and
    Space Force.
        Mr. Lohmeier, I must confess, I have deep concerns about
    your ability to represent these men and women. While I
    appreciate your past military service, your record of troubling
    conduct in uniform, extreme partisanship, and animosity toward
    military members with whom you disagree politically is, in my
    view, disqualifying to be the Under Secretary.
        We must acknowledge your record of behavior and statements.
    In 2021, while you were an Active Duty Space Force Lieutenant
    Colonel in command of a large formation, you self-published a
    book titled Irresistible Revolution: Marxism's Goal of Conquest
    and The Unmaking of the American Military. The book argues that
    Marxism is rampant within the ranks and is leading to the
    collapse of our military and our society. As you wrote, and
    I'll quote to be perfectly clear, ``The path we're on as the
    country leads to fratricidal and genocidal warfare.''
        While still on Active Duty in command, you went on a far-
    right podcast, which was known for spreading misinformation and
    conspiracy theories to advertise your book. All this was done
    without knowledge or approval of the Department of Defense. You
    were immediately relieved of command when your book and podcast
    were discovered.
        After leaving the Space Force, you have continued to write
    and speak extensively about Marxism in the military. You
    appeared on dozens of podcasts and panels, and made hundreds of
    social media posts about this specific issue. As you write in
    your book, Irresistible Revolution, I quote in one respect,
    ``U.S. military servicemembers are no different than members of
    the People's Liberation Army. Each is composed of humans,
    humans who share a common nature. Because we share the same
    nature, what Marxist's ideology does to the Chinese military
    servicemembers, it will do to the American.''
        Mr. Lohmeier, I've read much of your writing, and frankly,
    I would question your interpretation of Marxism. Nonetheless, I
    would make one point clear. I'm concerned that you have a
    misguided opinion of American military servicemembers and their
    leaders. If confirmed, you would lead an organization that,
    like the country it represents, is composed of Republicans,
    Democrats, Independents, men and women of all racist creeds and
    sexualities. Yet, your language suggests that you regard many
    of these men and women as adversaries to be rooted out and
    purged from the force.
        I would ask that you explain why servicemembers and
    civilians who do not share your political opinions can trust
    that they will not be targeted under your tenure. Just as
    importantly, I hope you'll pledge not to seek a retribution
    against any military members or civilians with whom you have
    disagreed and publicly criticized in the past, especially as
    many of them would serve under you, if confirmed.
        I hope you'll address these issues thoroughly and
    truthfully during your testimony. The Department of the Air
    Force faces enormous challenges in the years ahead. I'm going
    to ask for your views and how you would address them.
        Mr. Overbaugh, you have been nominated to be Deputy Under
    Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. If
    confirmed, you would serve as a principal intelligence advisor
    to the Secretary of Defense and would oversee the Defense
    intelligence enterprise. Your experience in the special
    operations and intelligence community should serve you well in
    this role.
        Among many issues you will oversee is the complicated
    network of Defense intelligence agencies. These agencies, DIA,
    NRO, NSA, and others continue to face challenges in efficiently
    coordinating intelligence among themselves in providing
    adequate resources to joint all-domain military operations.
    Such operations require split second targeting support, and I
    would like to know how you would ensure their success.
        Mr. Zimmerman, you have been nominated to be Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. If
    confirmed, you would be the principal advisor of the Under
    Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Secretary of Defense on
    international issues that relate to Europe, Russia, the Middle
    East, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere. I would note your
    experience as a career CIA officer with expertise in several of
    these regions.
        If confirmed, one of your challenges will be to ensure we
    continue to have cooperation and support from partners and
    allies in Europe and the Middle East, and I'm deeply concerned
    about the Administration's comments and actions regarding NATO
    and Ukraine. As the Administration continues to expand its
    campaign against the Houthis in Yemen, it would be more
    important than ever that we have reliable friends abroad to
    assist us in other areas. Mr. Zimmerman, I would like you to
    know your plans of balancing U.S. long-term international
    security objectives against short-term demands.
        Thanks, again, to our nominees. I look forward to your
    testimoneys. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Reed.
    I now have the pleasure of recognizing our colleague, Senator
    Hagerty, who I understand will be introducing Mr. Zimmerman
    this morning. So, I now turn to you, sir.

                   STATEMENT OF SENATOR BILL HAGERTY

        Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, and I want to
    thank you as well, Ranking Member Reed, and to all my esteemed
    colleagues here. Thank you for holding this hearing today, and
    importantly, to all of the very capable staff that are sitting
    behind you. Because I hope you'll look at Mr. Zimmerman and the
    position that he's in today, and realize that he was amongst
    your ranks, and he's sitting here today. I hope that many of
    you'll take this as an inspiration.
        It's my honor today to introduce my good friend Daniel
    Zimmerman, President Trump's nominee to be Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for International Security Affairs. Daniel is
    tailor-made for this role. For nearly two decades, Daniel has
    served with distinction at the Central Intelligence Agency, the
    White House, and most recently, right here in the U.S. Senate.
        While many of the details of his career remain classified,
    I can share a few anecdotes that highlight his experience and
    his expertise. Daniel has risked his life in war zones, working
    with special operations forces out of Soviet, Arab bunkers in
    Iraq to hunt ISIS and other terrorists. He's dealt face to face
    with Russian energy oligarchs, and traveled the world from
    Europe, to the Middle East, to the Indo-Pacific, all on
    sensitive matters that are related to energy and trade
    security. Daniel was one of the first people whom the White
    House hired to support the historic Abraham Accords, which is
    one of President Trump's signature achievements from his first
    term that is still bearing fruit in the Middle East today.
        For the last 15 months, I've had the great pleasure of
    having Daniel on my Senate staff. He's been a detailee who
    served with distinction. During this time, I found that his
    tremendous leadership skills, his knowledge of global issues,
    are matched only by his humility and his character. He's been a
    wonderful colleague and a friend.
        Daniel's the right person to serve as the next Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, and I
    urge the members of this committee to move quickly on his
    nomination. Thank you all for taking him into account this
    morning.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator Hagerty, and
    you are free to stay, but I'm sure your schedule is quite busy.
        Senator Kaine. So, Mr. Chair, I think a number of us, were
    hoping to cross-examine Senator Hagerty before he departs.
        [Laughter.]
        Chairman Wicker. Five minutes each for the first round.
        [Laughter.]
        Chairman Wicker. Only because it's a Thursday, we'll skip
    that today. Thank you. We will now begin with opening
    statements and we'll go in the order of Lohmeier, Overbaugh,
    and Zimmerman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your
    opening statement, sir.

    STATEMENT OF MR. MATTHEW L. LOHMEIER, TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF
                               AIR FORCE

        Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
    Reed, and members of this committee for considering my
    nomination to be Under Secretary of the Department of the Air
    Force. I'm grateful for the opportunity, and for the trust of
    President Trump. To the many troops, men, and women, both
    uniformed and civilian, who have expressed overwhelming support
    for me, thank you to those listening who have served or who
    presently serve. You have my gratitude.
        I wish to acknowledge and thank my friends and family for
    their support, some of whom are here today, including my
    parents. I'd especially like to acknowledge and thank my wife,
    Sarah, who is here. What a blessing it is for a man who
    personally cares deeply about the Air Force core values of
    integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we
    do, to live with a wife who likewise believes in and embodies
    those values. Furthermore, she more than anyone else knows that
    I strive to be a man of integrity, and that I hope to inspire
    others to live in that same spirit.
        The Under Secretary of the Air Force is by law the Chief
    Management Officer of the Department of the Air Force. My
    breadth of experience serving in both the Air and Space Forces
    makes me uniquely qualified for the job at this pivotal time in
    American history, a time in which we face very serious threats
    to our national security.
        Even before receiving my commission, while still a cadet at
    the United States Air Force Academy 20 years ago, I began to
    become aware of the threats we face when I participated in a
    special exchange program to China that we no longer have. The
    U.S. Government sent a small contingent of Mandarin-speaking
    Air Force Cadets to the People's Liberation Army Air Force
    Academy in Changchun, China. It's north of North Korea.
        For a brief cold stint in March 2005, I lived in the dorms
    with the PLA cadets, attended their classes, even aeronautical
    engineering, did PT with those cadets in the snow, ate in their
    chow hall, and was wittingly placed on a losing basketball team
    so that they could film our crushing defeat in front of their
    entire cadet body, no doubt for distribution in State media.
        Most U.S. Air Force Academy cadets know what I mean when I
    say there's no better view of the Air Force Academy than in the
    rear-view mirror. But after spending time at the Chinese Air
    Force Academy, returning to USFA was a treat. Later, after
    graduating and receiving a commission from the Air Force
    Academy, I finished pilot training and became a T-38 instructor
    pilot where I taught future fighter pilots for both the United
    States and our foreign mission partners.
        I then flew F-15Cs out of Kadena Airbase in Okinawa, Japan.
    That assignment served as yet another reminder to me of the
    threat posed by the PRC to our allies and our strategic
    partners, as well as to our own economic prosperity, and
    military interests at home and abroad. I am keenly aware of
    that threat, and I understand the need for ready Air and Space
    Forces well trained and equipped to meet the China challenge to
    deter any aggression, and if needed, to defeat that aggression.
        Following my time in the cockpit, I transferred to what was
    then Air Force Space Command, and provided strategic and
    theater missile warning for the United States and our allies.
    When the Space Force was subsequently created, I was entrusted
    with command of that same mission leading a combined operation
    of U.S. and allied partners in control of our Nation's $18
    billion space-based missile warning architecture.
        I share that background to make this point. I speak the
    language of both the Air Force and the Space Force. I am air-
    minded and space-minded. I understand the necessity of United
    States superiority in both of those war fighting domains.
    Space, in particular, is a strategic domain. It is a theater
    where we pursue many objectives, and where the United States
    must prevail. Space is necessarily also an operational domain
    because our ability to access and use space is a vital national
    interest.
        Despite my background, I've been startled by just how much
    has changed and developed technologically since I left Active
    Duty just shy of 4 years ago. My surprise is evidence of the
    dynamic and rapidly evolving threat environment, mentioned here
    several weeks ago by Dr. Troy Meink. Combatant commanders are
    calling for more air and space power capacity, not less. I'm
    persuaded that, if confirmed, I must be a strong advocate for a
    larger and better funded Department of the Air Force. Every
    single national security option the President needs is
    underpinned by air space power.
        The President has nominated me for this important position
    with the trust that I'll be a driving force behind a culture of
    integrity in the Department of the Air Force. This includes
    eliminating all unnecessary distractions, and enabling military
    members to focus on their mission.
        Secretary Hegseth has said his priorities include restoring
    the warrior ethos, and a focus on warfighting, rebuilding the
    military, and reestablishing deterrence. I am firmly aligned
    with those priorities, and there are unique ways in which they
    must be accomplished in the air and space forces. If confirmed,
    all of my efforts will be nested within that framework.
        Thank you, and I look forward to taking your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
    follows:]

           Prepared Statement by Statement of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
        Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and members of
    this Committee, for considering my nomination to be the Under Secretary
    of the Department of the Air Force. I'm grateful for the opportunity,
    and for the trust of President Trump.
        To the many troops--men and women, both uniformed and civilian--who
    have expressed overwhelming support for me: thank you. To those here or
    who may be listening who have served or who presently serve: you have
    my gratitude.
        I wish to acknowledge and thank my friends and family for their
    support, some of whom are here today. I'd especially like to
    acknowledge and thank my wife Sara, who is here with me today. What a
    blessing it is for a man who personally cares deeply about the Air
    Force core values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and
    Excellence in All We Do, to live with a wife who likewise believes in
    and embodies those values. Furthermore, she, more than anyone else,
    knows that I strive to be a man of integrity, and that I hope to
    inspire others to live in that same spirit.
        The Under Secretary of the Air Force is, by law, the Chief
    Management Officer of the Department of the Air Force. My breadth of
    experience serving in both the Air and Space Forces makes me uniquely
    qualified for the job at this pivotal time in American history.
        Even before receiving my commission, while still a cadet at the
    United States Air Force Academy 20 years ago, I participated in a
    special exchange program to China that we no longer have. The U.S.
    Government sent a small contingent of Mandarin-speaking Air Force
    cadets to the People's Liberation Army Air Force Academy in ChangChun,
    China (it's north of North Korea). For a brief, cold stint in March
    2005, I lived in the dorms with PLA cadets, attended their classes, did
    PT with those cadets in the snow, ate in their chow hall, and was
    wittingly placed on a losing basketball team so that they could film
    our crushing defeat in front of their entire cadet body, no doubt for
    distribution in the State media.
        Later, after graduating and receiving a commission from the Air
    Force Academy, I finished pilot training and became a T-38 instructor
    pilot, where I taught future fighter pilots for both the United States
    and our foreign mission partners. I then flew F-15Cs out of Kadena Air
    Base in Okinawa, Japan. That assignment served as yet another reminder
    to me of the threat posed by China to our allies and strategic
    partners, as well as to our own economic prosperity and military
    interests at home and abroad.
        I am keenly aware of that threat, and I understand the need for
    ready air and space forces, well-trained and equipped to meet the China
    challenge, to deter any aggression and--if needed--to defeat it.
        Following my time in the cockpit, I transferred to what was then
    Air Force Space Command and provided strategic and theater missile
    warning for the United States and our allies. When the Space Force was
    subsequently created, I was entrusted with command of that same
    mission, leading a combined operation of U.S. and allied partners in
    control of our Nation's $18 billion space-based missile warning
    architecture.
        I speak the language of the Air Force and the Space Force, I am
    air-minded and space-minded, and I understand the necessity of United
    States superiority in both of those warfighting domains. Despite my
    background, however, I've been startled by just how much has changed
    and developed technologically since I left Active Duty just shy of 4
    years ago. My surprise is evidence of the dynamic and rapidly evolving
    threat environment mentioned here several weeks ago by Dr. Troy Meink.
    Combatant Commanders are calling for more air and space power capacity,
    not less. I'm persuaded that, if confirmed, I must be a strong advocate
    for a larger and better-funded Department of the Air Force. Every
    single national security option the President needs is underpinned by
    air and space power.
        The President has nominated me for this important position with the
    trust that I will be a driving force behind a culture of integrity in
    the Department of the Air Force. This includes eliminating all
    unnecessary distractions and enabling military members to focus on
    their mission. The American people, like me, want nothing less than to
    enable our Department's men and women to succeed so that our military
    can--through strength--deter conflict.
        Secretary Hegseth has said his priorities include 1) Restoring the
    Warrior Ethos and a Focus on Warfighting, 2) Rebuilding the Military,
    and 3) Reestablishing Deterrence. I am firmly aligned with those
    priorities, and there are unique ways in which they must be
    accomplished in the Air and Space Forces. If confirmed, all of my
    efforts will be nested within that framework.
        Thank you, again, and I look forward to your questions.

        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Mr. Overbaugh.

       STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH, TO BE DEPUTY UNDER
           SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY

        Mr. Overbaugh. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and
    distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the
    chance to appear before you today, and for your consideration
    of my nomination to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
    Intelligence and Security. I am honored and grateful for this
    opportunity to serve our great nation.
        I'm truly humbled by the nomination, and thankful to
    President Trump and Secretary Hegseth for placing their trust
    in me. Above all, I am profoundly grateful to God for his
    countless blessings, and the unmerited grace and forgiveness He
    so generously offers through his son Jesus Christ. I'm joined
    today by my precious wife of 21 years, Rebecca, and our four
    sons; Joshua, Benjamin, Gabriel, and Matthias of whom we are so
    proud. We are also blessed to have a number of family, friends,
    and former teammates with us here today and watching online as
    well. Having their love and support means the world to me.
        If confirmed, I look forward to bringing over 25 years of
    intelligence and security experience to the role. Most
    recently, I served as director of intelligence for a special
    operations joint task force, supporting a new U.S. Special
    Operations Command organization focused on global coordination
    of unique capabilities against great power competitors. I
    collaborated extensively across the intelligence community, the
    interagency, and with foreign partners to address high priority
    threats.
        Prior to that, I held leadership and staff positions in
    human intelligence, counterintelligence, and counter-terrorism.
    In these roles, I led both military and civilian teammates in
    tactical and operational deployments to both Afghanistan and
    Iraq, and strategic assignments in Europe and the United
    States.
        I routinely informed Pentagon and Combatant Command
    decisionmaking regarding joint and multilateral sensitive
    intelligence operations, which I also personally coordinated
    with chiefs of station and foreign intelligence partners across
    Europe. These operations were instrumental in countering
    foreign influence and terror threats against the United States
    and our partners, strengthening relationships with key allies
    and positioning our forces to deter, and if necessary, defeat
    our adversaries.
        If confirmed, along with supporting the priorities of
    Secretary Hegseth and Mr. Hansell, should he also be confirmed,
    I will advocate for the following areas of emphasis. I hope to
    lead the enterprise in strategic assessments that shape defense
    requirements, ensuring they are data-driven, actionable, and
    aligned with national security priorities. I believe that we do
    not have the resources to cover all threats simultaneously.
    Therefore, we must be deliberate and discerning about the
    capabilities we pursue to defend our Nation and deter, or if
    necessary, defeat our adversaries.
        If confirmed, I would encourage the enterprise to reassess
    established analytical frameworks, fostering innovation and
    adaptive thinking to tackle dynamic threats. I believe the
    warrior ethos includes the courage and mental clarity required
    to challenge personal and institutional bias, and overcome
    bureaucratic intransigence.
        Finally, I would drive the enterprise to prioritize
    actionable intelligence, providing clear insights to support
    decisionmaking from the platoon leader to the President. I
    believe intelligence professionals must be able to separate
    signals from noise in order to be value added to the
    warfighter.
        Progress in these areas would improve decision support and
    security for the enterprise and the American people. This is
    desperately needed as I sincerely believe we face some of the
    most daunting challenges in the history of our Nation.
        Again, I thank you for your consideration, and I look
    forward to answering your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
    follows:]

           Prepared Statement by Statement of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
        Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and distinguished members of
    this Committee, thank you for the chance to appear before you today and
    for your consideration of my nomination to be the Deputy Under
    Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security.
        I am honored and grateful for this opportunity to serve our great
    Nation. I am truly humbled by the nomination, and thankful to President
    Trump and Secretary Hegseth for placing their trust in me.
        Above all, I am profoundly grateful to God for His countless
    blessings and the unmerited grace and forgiveness He so generously
    offers through His son Jesus Christ.
        I am joined today by my precious wife of 21 years, Rebecca and our
    four sons, Joshua, Benjamin, Gabriel, and Matthias, of whom we are so
    proud.
        If confirmed, I look forward to bringing over 25 years of
    intelligence and security experience to the role. Most recently, I
    served as director of intelligence for a special operations joint task
    force, supporting a new U.S. Special Operations Command organization
    focused on global coordination of unique capabilities against great
    power competitors. I collaborated extensively across the intelligence
    community, the interagency, and with foreign partners to address high-
    priority threats. Prior to that, I held leadership and staff positions
    in human intelligence, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism. In
    these roles, I led both military and civilian teammates in tactical and
    operational deployments to both Afghanistan and Iraq and strategic
    assignments in Europe and the United States. I routinely informed
    Pentagon and Combatant Command decisionmaking regarding joint and
    multilateral sensitive intelligence operations, which I also personally
    coordinated with chiefs of station and foreign intelligence partners
    across Europe. These operations were instrumental in countering foreign
    intelligence and terror threats against the United States and our
    partners, strengthening relationships with key allies and positioning
    our forces to deter, and if necessary, defeat our adversaries.
        If confirmed, along with supporting the priorities of Secretary
    Hegseth and Mr. Hansell (should he also be confirmed), I will advocate
    for the following areas of emphasis:
        I hope to lead the enterprise in strategic assessments that shape
    defense requirements, ensuring they are data-driven, actionable, and
    aligned with national security priorities. I believe that we do not
    have the resources to cover all threats simultaneously, therefore we
    must be deliberate and discerning about the capabilities we pursue to
    defend our Nation and deter, or if necessary, defeat, our adversaries.
        If confirmed, I would encourage the enterprise to reassess
    established analytical frameworks, fostering innovation and adaptive
    thinking to tackle dynamic threats. I believe the Warrior Ethos
    includes the courage and mental clarity required to challenge personal
    and institutional bias and overcome bureaucratic intransigence.
        Finally, I would drive the enterprise to prioritize actionable
    intelligence, providing clear insights to support decisionmaking from
    the platoon leader to the President. I believe intelligence
    professionals must be able to separate signals from noise in order to
    be value added to the Warfighter.
        Progress in these areas would improve decision support and security
    for the enterprise and the American people. This is desperately needed
    as I sincerely believe we face some of the most daunting challenges in
    the history of our Nation.
        Again, I thank you for your consideration and look forward to
    answering your questions.

        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, sir. Mr. Zimmerman.

    STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
             OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS

        Mr. Zimmerman. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and
    distinguished members of the Armed Services Committee, thank
    you for the chance to appear before you today to be considered
    for the role of Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    International Security Affairs.
        I am honored by the President's nomination and by his
    trust. I also thank Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby
    for their support. I'm humbled by Senator Hagerty's
    introduction, and grateful for his leadership and example
        Mr. Chairman, with permission, I'll briefly mention some
    priorities that, if confirmed, I would anticipate meriting my
    full attention from day one. The International Security Affairs
    role spans Europe, Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia, the Middle East,
    and Africa. These theaters present many issues of consequence,
    which must be addressed judiciously and in ways that fully
    support the Department's primary goals of securing the homeland
    and deterring China.
        In my view, doing this will require cultivating strong
    partnerships in these regions that further U.S. interests, and
    encourage our allies urgently to embrace greater responsibility
    and burden sharing, which is both in their interest and ours.
        Resolutely addressing with allies persistent threats to our
    interests, such as those posed by Russia, Iran's potential to
    develop a nuclear weapon and terrorism, and countering China's
    ability to project military power influence in these theaters.
    All this can and should be done in a way that advances the
    President's and Secretary's America First, peace through
    strength agenda.
        If confirmed, I would draw on almost two decades of
    national security experience, intelligence, in policy roles,
    and in the field where I've had the privilege to work on many
    of the same issues and regions involved in this portfolio. The
    challenges are serious, yet familiar.
        Mr. Chairman, if I may introduce my family. My parents,
    David Zimmerman and Beth Zimmerman are here, to whom I owe
    immeasurable gratitude. I would like to acknowledge my sister,
    Tabitha Zimmerman, and three brothers; Ethan Zimmerman, Luke
    Zimmerman, and Nic Zimmerman, who along with my dad, have all
    served or are serving in our military and along with their
    exemplary colleagues. They hold my deepest respect.
        My four brave children are here; Ransom Zimmerman, Anchor
    Zimmerman, Haven Zimmerman, and Liberty Zimmerman. I have asked
    them to behave unless I get asked a tough question.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Zimmerman. Most important, my wife, Chloe Zimmerman, is
    here, a constant friend without parallel who continues to
    transform my life. I'm grateful for many other family and
    friends attending or listening today, and I give thanks to my
    great shepherd, the Lord Jesus.
        Mr. Chairman, if confirmed to this role, I would apply
    myself with all the humility, vigor, and excellence our country
    expects and deserves to help preserve the inestimable blessings
    of liberty for us and for the next generation. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Daniel Zimmerman follows:]

              Prepared Statement by Statement of Daniel Zimmerman
        Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and Members of the Armed
    Services Committee----
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to be considered
    for the role of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
    Security Affairs.
        I am honored by the President's nomination, and by his trust. I
    also thank Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby for their
    support.
        I am humbled by Senator Hagerty's introduction and am grateful for
    his leadership and example.
        Mr. Chairman, with permission, I will briefly mention some
    priorities that--if con.rmed--I would anticipate meriting my full
    attention from Day One. The International Security Affairs role spans
    Europe, Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia, the Middle East, and Africa. These
    theaters present many issues of consequence, which must be addressed
    judiciously and in ways that fully support the Department's primary
    goals of securing the homeland and deterring China. In my view, doing
    this will require:

          Cultivating strong partnerships in these regions that
    further U.S. interests and encourage our allies urgently to embrace
    greater responsibility and burden sharing--which is both in their
    interest and ours;

          Resolutely addressing, with allies, persistent threats to
    our interests such as those posed by Russia, Iran's potential to
    develop a nuclear weapon, and terrorism;

          And countering China's ability to project military power
    and influence in these theaters.

        All this can and should be done in a way that advances the
    President's and the Secretary's America first, peace through strength
    agenda.
        If confirmed, I would draw on almost two decades of national
    security experience in Intelligence, in policy roles, and in the field,
    where I have had the privilege to work on many of the same issues and
    regions involved in this portfolio. The challenges are serious, yet
    familiar.
        Mr. Chairman, if I may introduce my family, my parents David and
    Beth Zimmerman are here, to whom I owe immeasurable gratitude. I would
    like to acknowledge my sister Tabitha and three brothers Ethan, Luke,
    and Nic--who along with my Dad have all served or are serving in our
    military. Along with their exemplary colleagues, they hold my deepest
    respect.
        My four brave children are here--Ransom, Anchor, Haven, and
    Liberty. Most important, my wife Chloe is here--a constant friend
    without parallel, who continues to transform my life.
        I am grateful for many other family and friends attending or
    listening today. And I give thanks my Great Shepheard, the Lord Jesus.
        Mr. Chairman, I love this country. If confirmed to this role, I
    would apply myself with all the humility, vigor and excellence our
    country expects and deserves--to help preserve the inestimable
    blessings of liberty for us and for the next generation.

        Chairman Wicker. Well, thank you.
        Thanks to all three of you, and again, welcome to the
    family and friends. We now move to standard questions which are
    required of all civilian nominees. So, if you'll each turn your
    mics on and answer audibly. Have you adhered to applicable laws
    and regulations governing conflicts of interest?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
    actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
    confirmation process?
        [Witnesses answer in the negative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Exercising our legislative and oversight
    responsibilities makes it important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress
    receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other
    information from the executive branch on a timely basis. Do you
    agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before this
    committee when requested?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Do you agree to provide records,
    documents, and electronic communications in a timely manner
    when requested by this committee, its subcommittees, or other
    appropriate committees of Congress, and to consult with a
    requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or
    denial in providing such records?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Will you ensure that your staff complies
    with deadlines established by this committee for the production
    of reports, records, and other information, including timely
    responding to hearing questions for the record?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
    and briefers in response to congressional requests?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Will those witnesses and briefers be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
        [Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much.
        Now, we will move to questions by individual members of the
    committee, and I'll begin. First, for each of you. Much of the
    funding in the Reconciliation Bill, which is being put together
    now in the House and Senate, because of our rules, has to be
    unspecific and will technically be at the discretion of the
    Department of Defense, though we will write recommendations for
    them.
        A quick yes or no from each of you, and begin with Mr.
    Lohmeier. Do you commit to follow unequivocally the Congress's
    spending recommendation in Defense reconciliation?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Chairman Wicker.
        Chairman Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much.
        Then let's move then to Mr. Zimmerman and your prepared
    testimony. You mentioned burden sharing. Let's talk about NATO
    and the first Trump term. The President demanded that all NATO
    allies meet their burden-sharing obligations. Do you think the
    NATO members took this challenge seriously? It seems that
    they're reversing nearly two decades of decline. Do you believe
    this spending marks a renewed commitment on the part of our
    NATO allies to burden sharing, Mr. Zimmerman?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, thank you for the question. NATO is
    a very important alliance that U.S. commitments there are grave
    and serious. I do think there's general consensus that the
    alliance has to adapt. You mentioned very appropriately in your
    opening remarks, a threat environment where our adversaries are
    colluding and collaborating even more and more, underscoring
    the need for strong alliances and partnerships and greater
    burden sharing.
        I think there is reason to be encouraged by actions that
    some NATO members have taken to take greater ownership of their
    security needs and be alliance partners. I think the
    Administration has identified an urgent need for that process
    to accelerate.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay, and one other thing, and I'm glad to
    hear you come down strongly on behalf of our participation in
    this very important NATO alliance. As far as I know, we do not
    yet have a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for NATO. Will
    you commit to filling this position at the earliest
    opportunity?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, to the extent I can manage that, I
    commit.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay, and do you agree it would be very
    important for that to be filled based on your earlier
    testimony?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, the NATO alliance is a very
    important alliance.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay. Thank you very much.
        Let me go back to Mr. Lohmeier, and let me choose my words
    here. As the Department of the Air Force makes major basing
    decisions, currently including platforms and mission sets like
    F-15EX, KC-46, and space control, and very soon the future CCA
    and the F-47 support infrastructure, many of us on the
    committee remain concerned about the consistency, fairness, and
    transparency of the process.
        Mr. Lohmeier, are you aware that in the Fiscal Year 2025
    NDAA, which was passed by the Congress and signed into law by
    the President, we prohibited programmatic basing decisions or
    programmatic sole source basing decisions? Are you aware of
    that?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator.
        Chairman Wicker. If confirmed, will you commit to upholding
    this law?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I am committed to upholding the
    law in every respect, if I'm confirmed.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay. Well, and let me just say, how you
    do this is going to be very important. There are strategic
    imperatives and objective criteria that should be paramount
    rather than political considerations.
        Frankly, I'm going to say this after the politicization of
    the Space Command Headquarters basing decision, do you think
    we've got some confidence rebuilding to do, and what
    specifically will you do to restore confidence that this is
    being called according to statute and called by the numbers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, I think it's very important, Senator,
    and I share your concern that we eliminate the politics of the
    decisionmaking process. The service secretaries and the Under
    Secretaries should work very carefully to make data-driven
    decisions and decisions that will most benefit the warfighter
    and our strategic posturing around the globe.
        So, you have my commitment, if confirmed, that we'll do our
    very best to make sure those decisions are based on the needs
    of those capabilities in various locations and strategy, not
    based on politics.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. How's your Mandarin?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Hai hao.
        Chairman Wicker. Did you get that Madam Clerk? Thank you
    very much. Senator Reed.
        Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, you posted the following on your X account on
    October 19th, 2024. ``If we are fortunate enough to see a Trump
    presidency once again, then there will be serious consequences
    for those senior leaders who have broken their oath, betrayed
    the trust of the American people, and participated in the
    hyper-politicalization of the uniformed services. Let me tell
    you about one such officer who still serves--'' Mr. Lohmeier,
    what did you mean by serious consequences for these officers,
    many who are still serving and would be serving in the Air
    Force?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you for bringing this up, Senator. I
    share your concern for and commitment to ensuring that we've
    got a relatively apolitical military workplace. It was one of
    the driving motivating factors prior to my separation from
    service in the fall of 2021 for the things that I wrote and
    spoke about.
        I was never publicly critical of my chain of command. I was
    never publicly critical of my senior leaders while I served in
    the uniform of my country. As you mentioned, that post was put
    on X in my private capacity as a private citizen in 2024. I've
    been out of uniform for the past 4 years, nearly, and have
    rather enjoyed my ability to speak freely and express a full
    range of the expression of my ideas on platforms such as X.
        However, I'm very committed, if confirmed, to making sure
    that we eliminate political distractions from the military
    workplace. Our servicemembers and the American people truly
    deserve the opportunity to serve in a nonpartisan military
    workplace. What I meant by the statement was that I believe
    that a Trump presidency or a Trump administration would take
    accountability very seriously. We wouldn't overlook that kind
    of partisan politicization of the military workplace that I
    believed we had experienced in the past years.
        Senator Reed. Do you commit then to not take any action
    against any individual military or civilian who carried out DOD
    policy and regulations or implemented any laws enacted by
    Congress?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I think I heard all of the question.
    I missed probably part of it, but the tenor was that asking of
    me a commitment to not hold certain leaders accountable who
    were following the law or implementing policy. In that vein, or
    that spirit, or in principle, I'm only interested in holding
    people accountable who don't follow the law and who don't honor
    their oath to the Constitution, which I take very seriously.
        Again, I'm very interested in nonpartisanship from our
    uniform wearers in particular, and giving the right to the
    American people to entertain their partisan arguments. But I
    have no vindictive spirit. I'm not interested in retribution,
    but I am interested, if confirmed, and looking forward in
    making sure we have proper accountability and high standards in
    the Department of the Air Force.
        Senator Reed. Then you disavowed the statement you made in
    October 2024, saying, if Trump takes over, there will be
    consequences for people. Most of the consequences, I assume
    would be targeted to people who you were had differences with
    because of their support of the policies including equity and
    other policies. Is that true, or you were just making up all
    the stuff in your post in the last several years?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, I'd love to look at the
    context of all of the statements that I've made, but I will
    make just one point that as I've contemplated the path to
    confirmation or through the confirmation process, which I've
    taken very seriously. I very much had in mind the social media
    presence, podcast appearances, media appearances I've had for 4
    years, and I've left every last jot and tittle of that up
    online and available because I'm very deliberate in what I
    choose to say.
        I believe in what I say, and I also reserve the right to be
    wrong about things and to change my opinion about things. But I
    have nothing to hide. I try and speak what I believe to be
    true, and I'm happy to be corrected about things in which I'm
    mistaken. But in principle, what I was intending to say in that
    post was that I believe accountability matters, and that's the
    spirit of what I was trying to get at.
        If confirmed, I'd look forward to ensuring we've got a
    culture of accountability in the Department of the Air Force.
    That was not intended to be retroactive or retribution in
    nature, but simply intended to communicate that leaders who
    prioritize accountability and high standards will do the
    American people and servicemembers service by committing to
    that.
        Senator Reed. Well, I think we all want to see leaders who
    are accountable themselves and also the highest standards, but
    those standards have to be consistent with this country and the
    servicemen and women who serve. They come from, as I indicated,
    many races, many nationalities, different views, political, or
    otherwise.
        The goal is, as you indicated, is an apolitical military
    force. Everything that I've read in your book and everything
    else is far from apolitical. You've targeted individuals that
    you felt had for political reasons unfortunate views. If you
    carry that attitude into your job, you'll cause great confusion
    in the Air Force and great animosity within the ranks, fear, et
    cetera.
        So, thank you for your previous service. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman. Or Senator Cotton, are you in charge?
        Senator Cotton.
        [Presiding.] Mr. Overbaugh, I see the intelligence and the
    security shop in the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, not
    just through my work on this committee, but my work on the as
    chairman of the Intelligence Committee as well. I&S should be
    the central advocate for the DODs intelligence priorities and
    the central orchestrator to ensure that all defense
    intelligence agencies are meeting DOD needs. Yet, it has often
    seemed to me that all the agencies under the I&S umbrella
    appear to largely act on their own accord. Oftentimes, it seems
    a little direct oversight.
        Can you commit to working with me on this committee and on
    the Intelligence Committee to ensure that we improve I&S's
    enterprise governance to meet the Defense--to make sure that
    the Defense intelligence agencies are providing the
    intelligence that all of our warfighters need?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator. I absolutely can.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        Do share that assessment that it seems like oftentimes
    they're kind of all going off in their own direction?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I share your concerns in that
    regard, and what I can commit to you is, if confirmed for this
    position, I would place an emphasis on ensuring that the entire
    Defense, and intelligence, and security enterprise remains
    responsive, particularly to combatant commanders and the
    warfighters to ensure that they're well positioned to deal with
    global threats.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        I believe that part of the issue here is that I&S is not
    optimally organized to meet that role of guiding the Defense
    intelligence enterprise and advocating for Defense intelligence
    priorities.
        I put report language in last year's NDAA that mandated a
    GAO review of the authorities, the roles and responsibility of
    I&S. Can you commit to using the findings of that review to
    inform any potential organizational changes that might be made
    in I&S?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator, and as I mentioned in my open
    statement, I'm particularly concerned about bureaucratic
    intransigence. So, analyzing the structure and process within
    the organization would be a key focus, if I'm confirmed.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        As is often the case, while boxes and lines on a chart are
    important, they're not the only thing to consider. Sometimes,
    it's not the most important thing that needs to change.
    Sometimes, it is leadership and culture. I&S was dual headed as
    the Director of Defense Intelligence and the principal director
    or advisor to the Director of National Intelligence because
    Congress recognized the urgent need for a single proponent to
    ensure the broader national intelligence community meets
    Defense requirements.
        Yet, I don't think there's any documented processes or
    procedures for ensuring that collaboration between I&S and the
    ODNI, and I think the past interactions between ODNI and I&S
    have not been adequate. Can you commit to working with Mr.
    Hansell to make sure I&S is collaborating closely and
    productively and constructively with the ODNI?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I absolutely can, Senator, and this is
    something that Mr. Hansell and I have already had an
    opportunity to talk about. I share his passion, and I know that
    if we're confirmed, we look very much forward to working with
    ODNI, and Gabbard, and the rest of her team to ensure that that
    lash up takes place.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        To be clear, the work that the Defense intelligence
    agencies produce, I think it's stellar and topnotch. It's often
    some of the best intelligence reporting I see on this
    committee, and especially on the Intelligence Committee. We
    want to make sure that we're providing proper guidance for all
    those agencies underneath your orbit. Also, that they're having
    their proper influence within the broader intelligence
    community, especially claims on resources.
        Mr. Lohmeier the Air Force has been underfunded for a long
    time, especially in the last two Democratic Administrations.
    That's led to a dramatically smaller fighter force than we've
    had at any times since World War II. Yet, we need air
    superiority given the broad range of threats we face.
        Do you commit to working with the Administration and with
    Congress to be ensure that we increase resources going forward
    for the Air Force and Space Force?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I commit to that.
        Senator Cotton. You agree that we need those additional
    resources?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do agree.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        Part of the problem we've had, too, is a shortage of
    pilots. 1,800 pilot shortage across the total force. As of
    Fiscal Year 2024, retention is only averaging about 40 to 50
    percent. Do you agree that we need to focus very intently on
    both recruiting and retaining pilots?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, and this is a problem we've had
    for many years. It transcends Administrations, and I know that
    Air Force leaders and Administrations have tried to fix this
    problem. We try and throw money at the problem sometimes, and I
    think that that tends, frankly, to keep in those who are
    already probably on the fence and want to stay in any way. But
    I talked to many pilots, they're interested in fixing their
    quality of life and quality of service concerns as well. You
    have my commitment to try and solve these problems.
        Senator Cotton. The work I've done on this committee with
    Senator King are just the same. They're always welcome the
    money, but they don't join the Air Force, the Space Force for,
    you know, a couple thousand dollars more a month. They join it
    because they want to fly high-performance aircraft in defense
    of our Nation.
        One final question. The Ebbing Air National Guard Base in
    Arkansas is home to a growing international fighter training
    mission. We have 48 F-35 scheduled to be located at Ebbing over
    the next 3 years. The Air Force has worked with Senator
    Boozman, and Congressman Womack, and I, very well over the
    years to get this critical mission bedded down. I assume you
    agree that foreign military sales training remains a vital Air
    Force mission.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do, Senator,
        Senator Cotton. Thank you.
        If confirmed, we can count on you to continue to ensure the
    Air Force supports the mission in Ebbing, and has the resources
    necessary to train our allies?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, you have my commitment that
    I'll work very closely with the, with Dr. Meink, if he's
    confirmed. Also, be very transparent in my comms with you about
    the situation in your State.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you. Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you, gentlemen, for your past
    service to the country, and for your willingness to continue to
    serve. Welcome to all your families.
        On Tuesday, Secretary Hegseth announced by tweet that he
    was ending implementation of Women, Peace & Security at DOD,
    claiming it was a Biden era, DEI policy. Unfortunately, he
    missed the fact that President Trump and members of his current
    Administration, including Secretary Rubio, Mike Waltz, and
    Secretary Noem, all worked on this policy in 2017, and
    President Trump signed it. U.S. combat units began using female
    engagement teams during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to
    gather intelligence and build trust with local communities.
        Years later, because of the success of those efforts, we
    enshrined this concept into law as part of the WPS Act. Since
    that time, WPS has been used by the warfighters to identify
    victims of human trafficking and joint exercises on non-
    combatant evacuations, to provide human intelligence on violent
    extremist groups like ISIS and Al-Shabaab, and to understand
    the human terrain to improve kinetic and non-kinetic targeting.
        I'm very concerned that taking away these tools does not
    make us a stronger or more lethal fighting force, and in fact,
    it takes away some of the options we have to be successful.
    Secretary Hegseth also claims that warfighters hate it, and
    yet, the newly confirmed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs not only
    told this committee about WPS's operational value, but he was
    very clear that this is not DEI.
        Lawfare made public in an article last night, a memo from
    the Director of the Joint Staff providing their best military
    advice to the Secretary, and this is a direct quote from that
    article. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the article be
    introduced into the record.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        Chairman Wicker. [Presiding.] Without Objection.
        Senator Shaheen. The article points out from that memo, and
    I quote, ``China and Russia have no equivalent of WPS,'' and
    that the combatant commands 80 engagements with partners over
    the next 2 years under the program, ``counter China by gaining
    access to a population China largely ignores.'' The director
    continues that WPS, ``prevents radicalization by violent
    extremist organizations and disrupts the smuggling of
    narcotics, weapons, and humans into the United States.''
        Officials from every combatant command and from several
    other military components concurred with this recommendation
    from the Joint chiefs. This is information that's not new to
    this committee. Every four-star combatant commander has told us
    about the strategic advantage that WPS provides to our forward
    deployed forces.
        So, Mr. Zimmerman, you're nominated to oversee regional
    security for Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and the Western
    Hemisphere. Don't you need all the tools that are available to
    counter violent extremism in Africa and the Middle East? That's
    a question.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, thank you very much for the
    question. The violent extremism counterterrorism problem is a
    major concern, and if confirmed to this role, one that I'll be
    focused on. It does require, in my view, a whole-of-government
    type of approach. Sometimes, we can be too siloed as a
    government.
        In my background in the intelligence community, I've had
    the opportunity to work with many other inter-agency partners
    and see the value that comes from across our government. If
    confirmed to the role, I would of course make a priority to
    work with all the tools and coordinate to make sure all the
    tools are available.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        That argues in my mind for the importance of the WPS
    effort. Mr. Overbaugh, you're nominated to oversee intelligence
    functions for the Department of Defense. Again, if confirmed, I
    assume that you would like all tools available to gather human
    intelligence on the ground, especially in a conflict scenario?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Every single one I can get, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Mr. Lohmeier, you're nominated to be Under Secretary of the
    Air Force. If confirmed, I assume your forward deployed airmen
    will want to understand everything they can about the human
    terrain before taking strikes, like on Houthis targets in
    Yemen. Would you agree?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I would agree with that, Senator.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Senator Rounds.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        First of all, to all of you, thank you for your offer of
    additional service to our country. Mr. Overbaugh, how would you
    recommend addressing the evolving threats posed by near-peer
    adversaries in the domains of cyber artificial intelligence in
    space? It would appear to me that right now there is an
    overarching challenge from multiple near-peer adversaries with
    regard not just to airline and sea, but space and cyberspace.
    The areas that you'll be overseeing include both cyberspace and
    real space coordinated.
        Talk to us a little bit about how you see your role in
    terms of coordinating our response to those adversaries.
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, thank you for the question. We've
    already had a little bit of experience dealing particularly
    with a soft space cyber triad. It's a critical effort because
    as we continue to push into new domains to meet adversarial
    threats across the globe, we have to stitch those domains
    together in a way that achieves combined effects for the
    warfighter and in defense of the American people.
        As it relates to cyber threats that you mentioned, I am
    concerned about the threats to our critical infrastructure, the
    disinformation that can come through cyber threats, and also
    zero-day exploits. I think some of our solutions in zero trust
    architecture, active cyber defense, private-public
    collaboration, and offensive cyber capabilities are tools that
    would be able to bring to bear to meet those threats.
        Space threats, the presence of ever increasingly
    sophisticated ASAP weapons, particularly interested in space-
    based surveillance of our enemies, as well as jamming, and
    spoofing are of significant concern to me. I would look to
    advocate from the position that I'm being nominated, resilience
    and redundancy in our constellations, as well as ensuring
    complete space domain awareness and encouraging commercial
    partnerships to ensure that we're able to meet those threats
    effectively.
        Senator Rounds. One of the items Senator Cotton started on
    this line of questioning a little bit, and I want to pursue a
    little bit more, there clearly are stove pipes, some intended,
    some unintended, with regard to the sharing of information
    between Title 10 and Title 50 participants. But you've also
    added another item in which is also critical, and that is the
    private sector as well, which adds additional challenges.
        Could you talk about what your role is in terms of making
    sure that appropriate information is shared and that we make
    the most out of the information that we do gather?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I believe that the defense
    intelligence and security enterprise has a role in ensuring
    that we identify the threats accurately so that both public and
    private entities can work effectively to design solutions to
    deal with those threats as opposed to coming up with solutions
    that don't match up with the threats that we face.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you.
        Mr. Zimmerman, look, I've got just one real quick question
    for you, and that is basically right now, we've got the
    possibility if we have one of our near-peer adversaries
    confronting us in one theater, there's a very, very high
    probability that we'll have a second near-peer adversary
    confronting us in another theater.
        How do you see your role in terms of coordinating with our
    partners to make sure that we have the best advantages to be
    able to deal with two threats in two different theaters?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I appreciate the opportunity to
    talk about this just for a moment. I think the threat that you
    have articulated is one that requires utmost attention and
    underscores the relevance of this Administration's emphasis on
    partnering with allies, and for them to take greater ownership
    and take seriously their need to boost Defense spending.
        If confirmed to the role, one of the principal aspects of
    the job, as I understand it, is to manage Defense relations in
    the area of responsibility. If confirmed, I would do all I can
    to partner effectively with allies and partners to ensure that
    their security capabilities are at a level where we can have
    the right posture to address the threat you're describing. So,
    partnerships are extremely important, and if confirmed to the
    role, I would take that seriously.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you.
        Mr. Lohmeier, the B-21 Raider coming online shortly,
    probably one of the best and finest of the major projects out
    there on time, on budget. Currently, we're coordinated to have
    about 100 of them in. Clearly, that's not going to be enough.
    Would you seriously consider any requests out there to increase
    the number of B-21s that could be acquired by the Air Force as
    the needs arise?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, this issue is also very important to
    me. One of my priorities is going to be modernizing the nuclear
    enterprise. Of course, the B-21 is an important piece to that,
    and I understand that 100 B-21 program of record discussion to
    be rather maybe a floor. I'm very open to discussing more.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you. Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to ask each of you to respond very quickly to the
    following two initial questions that I ask of all of the
    nominees on any of the committees on which I sit. This goes to
    fitness to serve, and we'll start with Mr. Lohmeier. Since you
    became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted request for
    sexual favors, or committed any verbal or physical harassment,
    or assault of a sexual nature?
        [Witnesses answer in the negative.]
        Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline or entered
    into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct?
        [Witnesses answer in the negative.]
        Senator Hirono. Before I get to my questions for Mr.
    Lohmeier, let me be clear. Mr. Lohmeier, you were fired,
    removed from command for going on a partisan podcast and
    pushing political conspiracy theories while in uniform. Since
    leaving Active Duty, you have spread divisive, harmful views on
    race, equality, LGBTQ rights, and talked openly about seeking
    retribution against those you perceived did you wrong. Exactly
    the kinds of comments that undermine the unity and
    professionalism of that our military depends on.
        As if that wasn't bad enough, you're also a January 6th
    conspiracy theorist, calling it, ``a government-led false flag
    and hoax at the Capitol.'' I have deep concerns about your
    nomination to be Under Secretary of the Air Force, and just as
    much concern about what this nomination says to the members of
    our military.
        I'm very glad that Senator Shaheen asked of questions
    relating to--by the way, that this is a comment to all of you
    about the importance of WPS, and I'm glad that she pointed out
    that this is a very useful tool that neither Russia nor China
    have to combat extremism. To me, this is yet another example of
    the obsession that this Administration has against a whole
    swath of programs and efforts that this Administration deems
    DEI.
        So, I'll get to my questions. Mr. Lohmeier, I hope you can
    answer these questions yes or no? Do you believe that January
    6th attack on the Capitol, it was, ``a government-led false
    flag operation''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, let me begin by respectfully saying
    that I believe you've mischaracterized me and my views. Now----
        Senator Hirono. Excuse me----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
        Senator Hirono.--could you just respond to whether or not
    you believe that that January 6th attack was a government-led
    false flag operation? If you no longer believe that, just tell
    me.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I have never said exactly what you've just
    attributed to me, but I will answer your question, Senator. I
    believe that it's evident that there were, in fact, undercover
    government agents at the Capitol on January 6th, but I have not
    said exactly what you've said. I'm always careful the way I
    characterize things.
        Senator Hirono. Excuse me, my time is running out. You deny
    saying it. Do you believe the January 6th attack on the Capitol
    was a hoax?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I've never used the word hoax, I believe, to
    characterize the event. But what I have just stated, I do
    believe, which is that there were most certainly----
        Senator Hirono. So, excuse me, again, you deny saying that.
    Oh, are you planning to reprise against, I know that Senator
    Reed asked you some questions, but I want to actually name
    names. Are you planning to reprise against General Whiting,
    Major General Pepper, Colonel Fran, or any other Active
    military servicemember for perceived slights against you?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, as I've said previously in the
    hearing, I'm very focused on moving forward in the future, and
    making sure that I hold people accountable for their----
        Senator Hirono. Actually, that's why I'm asking you the
    question. So, let me ask you this. If confirmed, will you
    recuse yourself from initiating or being involved in any
    administrative or personnel actions involving General Whiting,
    General Pepper, and Colonel Fran, yes or no?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I know two of the----
        Senator Hirono. Will you recuse yourself?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I know two of the individuals you've
    mentioned. One of them is a combatant commander who I presume
    has the trust and respect of the President of the United
    States, and----
        Senator Hirono. Could you just respond to my question,
    please? I know you're taking up my time.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I----
        Senator Hirono. Will you recuse yourself against in any
    actions that relate to these people that I just mentioned?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, what I will commit to is that I will
    treat all people fairly according to the law, and I'll try and
    do my job to the best of my duty, if I'm confirmed.
        Senator Hirono. That is totally not reassuring. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman. I do have other questions for this nominee, for
    the record.
        Chairman Wicker. We'll have other rounds. Mr. Lohmeier, you
    were beginning to say what you do believe about January the
    6th. So, go ahead and finish that thought if you----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you, Senator. What I was saying is that
    I believe there were many Americans who were gathered that day
    as a part of a protest, and I also think it's been politically
    fraught for many years, and it continues to be brought up
    because there's so much uncertainty about what was really going
    on. Totally outside of my lane as a nominee for the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed, it's my job is to
    organize training and equip forces to provide the combatant
    commanders and the Air and Space Forces, and that's what I'd be
    focused on.
        Chairman Wicker. Okay. Senator Hirono, in light of my
    intervention, do you have any followup question at this point?
        Senator Hirono. No, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Oh, okay. Thank you very much.
        Senator Hirono. My only comment is that his refusal to
    answer very clearly the questions does not reassure me at all
    that he is qualified to take this position.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, ma'am. Senator Ernst.
        Senator Ernst. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thanks
    to all of our witnesses for being here today, and for
    continuing your service to these great United States of
    America.
        I do want to start--Mr. Lohmeier, we'll start and talk
    about an issue that is extremely important to me and to all of
    Iowa, and that is about our Air National Guard Refueling Wing,
    located in Sioux City, Iowa. When the National Guard's 185th
    Air refueling wing in Sioux City was converted from the F-16
    fighters to the KC-135 tankers back in 2003, the Air Force said
    it would upgrade the airfield at the Iowa National Guard
    Facility. Again, this is 22 years ago. This is an important
    issue. It is one I have pushed with the Air Force for a number
    of years now. So, this line of questioning should be no
    surprise.
        Because the tankers require--they do have heavier
    airframes, they have greater fuel loads that they will be
    delivering. The runway is unable to hold that load. Okay? So,
    this is critical importance. Unfortunately, the Air Force and
    the National Guard never followed through on their promise to
    upgrade that runway. They failed in their commitment to
    complete the runway upgrade.
        So, I am additionally concerned with this failure, because
    now we have a conversion of the 135s to the KC-46s, and the
    185th Air refueling Squadron could potentially lose its mission
    because of the failure to upgrade this runway. It will directly
    impact the retention of the immense talent of these guardsmen
    in Sioux City. This is completely unacceptable, and the Air
    Force must live up to its commitment as of 22 years ago.
        So, Mr. Lohmeier, is the Air National Guard a vital
    component of the Air Force?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. It is.
        Senator Ernst. Is it essential that the Air National Guard
    has the infrastructure and resources necessary to execute its
    missions effectively?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Every time the Guard comes up, Senator,
    I often reflect on the fact that when I was an F-15 fighter
    pilot, I never even knew what unit happened to be providing
    fuel to me on the tanker in front of me. There's such a
    seamless integration between our Active Duty reserve and guard
    personnel. I think this is a very important issue.
        Senator Ernst. Absolutely, and I appreciate that. If
    confirmed, do I have your commitment unequivocally, that you
    will fully fund the runway upgrade at the Iowa National Guard
    facility in Sioux City, and ensure it's at the top of the Air
    National Guard MILCON priorities for the fiscal year 26 NDAA?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, like you, I don't like it when
    people make commitments and can't keep them. I think it's
    important to the trust of the American people, and it's
    important for the Air Force to keep its commitments. So, I'm
    familiar with the history that you've laid out.
        Unlike perhaps those that have gone before, I'll commit a
    little bit differently to you, that I'll be very transparent in
    my communications with you. I'll take this particular issue
    very seriously, and I want to make sure that if I make
    commitments to you or to the American people, that I'll be able
    to follow through, or the Department of the Air Force will be
    able to follow through. That is, so I'll take that very
    seriously.
        Senator Ernst. That is disappointing, though, Mr. Lohmeier.
    I think I heard a commitment to Senator Cotton about his home
    State priority. I am asking for a commitment for my home State
    priority. The very mission of this unit relies upon an upgrade
    of its runway. So, this is very problematic for me. I have been
    bringing this up with the Air Force for years now.
        I'm asking that a commitment be honored for our Iowa Air
    National Guard and the community that supports this National
    Guard Unit. So, given the lack of commitment around this
    project and its direct impact on the 185th's ability to perform
    its mission, I want to make sure we're not putting the cart
    before the horse.
        So, again, Mr. Lohmeier, I'll give you a second chance
    here. Can I at least have your commitment that you will work
    with the Secretary of the Air Force to pause any discussion on
    changing the 185th Air Refueling Wing's mission set?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, yes, you have my commitment that I
    will, if confirmed, work very closely with Dr. Meink, if he's
    confirmed, to carefully make data-driven decisions and consider
    all variables. I don't think these are decisions that should
    ever be taken lightly. I certainly don't like that we can't
    follow through with commitments that we've made.
        So, I make the same commitment to you that I've made to
    Senator Cotton, or that I'd be willing to make with any Senator
    in this room, that I'll weigh each matter in a nonpolitical
    manner, try and make the best decisions for the Force. Of
    course, I'm very interested, Senator, as you suggested, in
    honoring the commitments that the Department of the Air Force
    has made in the past where that's feasible. I'd look forward to
    learning more about that.
        Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Lohmeier.
        I want to be clear. This isn't just about the runway. It's
    about whether our Air National Guard is treated as an equal
    partner, as you stated earlier, international defense, or as an
    afterthought. Unfortunately, they have been treated as an
    afterthought. The Iowa's 185th has served with honor, and they
    absolutely deserve infrastructure that matches their
    operational demands. I'm going to continue to press on this,
    and I hope that I have resolution in the near future. We need
    to make sure these commitments are honored. Thank you, Mr.
    Chair.
        Chairman Wicker. Senator Kaine.
        Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the witnesses,
    congratulations for your nominations.
        There's a beautiful phrase in the New Testament in both the
    Gospels of Luke and Matthew that goes something like this; From
    the fullness of the heart, the mouth speaks. Mr. Lohmeier, I
    want to ask you about your very active mouth and what it
    reveals about your heart, your tweeting.
        I'll just give you a few examples. August 9th, 2024, ``The
    left lies about nearly everything it does, and tens of millions
    of Americans believe the lies.'' So, trashing the left and
    calling tens of millions of Americans, dupes. August 2d, 2024,
    ``If today, you're wondering why the left and Mit Romney seem
    to have entirely lost any semblance of a moral compass,
    Vladimir Lenin provides you the answer.'' April 1st, 2023, ``Of
    all that is good and decent, the left is the real oppressor.''
        But the one I want to ask you about is the one that Senator
    Hirono asked you about, and she read you an excerpt. I'll read
    the whole thing. A tweet from August 9th, 2024, ``Picked this
    up in my basic exchange at Buckley Air Force Base, several
    weeks after J6. This is what the Biden/Harris administration
    ushered in after a government-led false flag and hoax at the
    Capitol. They immediately demonized the men and women in
    uniform. Then they purge conservatives and Christians with
    their shot mandates. Brilliant planning, actually.''
        Tell me what the phrase that you wrote, ``government-led
    false flag and hoax at the Capitol.'' What does that mean with
    reference to January 6th?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks for bringing this up again, Senator. I
    like the verses that you've read. I agree that it matters a
    great deal that we try and speak truthfully. I'll remind you,
    respectfully, that the comments that I made that you've just
    shared, were shared on my X account, I presume, while I was a
    private citizen in this country in 2024. I'd been out of
    uniform for 3 years. In fact, with absolutely no intention of
    returning to public service, I was quite enjoying private life
    and being able to criticize people as I wish.
        Senator Kaine. So, they were a sincere reflection of what
    you had in your heart at the time?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, in as much as those statements were
    properly contextualized, and I can't speak to the context from
    which you've read. I always do try and speak honestly, and
    again, reserve the right to be wrong about any of my views.
    That is----
        Senator Kaine. But how about just the phrase. With respect
    to January 6th, what does your phrase, a government-led false
    flag and hoax at the Capitol.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Let me share, too, that I while I do
    recognize the other quotes that you've read, I don't recall
    having written those words that you've just read about January
    6th. So that could be partly a memory problem. It could be that
    I retweeted something and that quote has been pulled, but I
    don't recall using that phrase.
        What I do believe is that private citizens in this country
    can have the right to express their views as mean or as wrong
    as they might be, and that the men and women in uniform defend
    the right of the private citizen to speak those views. That my
    concern while I was in uniform was in fact that the kind of
    partisan rhetoric that I had used, that you've just quoted
    from, for example, was actually being inserted into the
    military workplace in a way that divides troops.
        So, I was trying to hold our military, cultural, and
    workplace environment accountable to a standard of
    nonpartisanship, as I've indicated, so that we could thrive in
    unity and not division. Now, private citizens have the right to
    say this.
        Senator Kaine. I completely agree. Private citizens have
    the right to say and believe whatever they want. This is a
    hearing about your qualifications for the position. The
    qualifications are essentially, in my view, a mixture of three
    things; background, character, and judgment. It's about
    judgment. I don't want to confirm somebody into the Pentagon
    who would fall for a conspiracy theory that a fourth grader
    would find incredible.
        If I searched your social media, and I saw you praising the
    Great Pumpkin over and over again, you would have the right to
    have that view. But I wouldn't want somebody who believed in
    the Great Pumpkin to be in the position that you're nominated
    for. So, if I'm thinking about people in the military. I know
    Virginia has an awful lot of people in the military. One of my
    kids is in the military. There are people in the military who
    are left, right, center, and maybe even more who are completely
    disinterested in politics, and we got crazy.
        But how would somebody who's in the left, or considers
    themself in the left serving in the Air Force, when you say the
    left lies about nearly everything it does, of all that is good
    and decent, the left is the real oppressor. How would any
    person who identifies that way feel any confidence that you as
    a leader would have their back?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I think it's a great question.
    It's one I actually share your concern for and care greatly
    about. Let me just share briefly in a 10-second answer. That at
    the time that I departed from Active Duty, I had young men and
    women in uniform of all racial or ethnic backgrounds, certainly
    different political backgrounds coming to me privately, sending
    me notes and saying, ``Sir, I never knew what your political
    worldview was. I don't understand completely why you've chosen
    to now take a stand for these issues or write about what you
    did, but I respect you as a leader.'' If confirmed, I'd be
    happy to come back----
        Senator Kaine. My time has run over, but I'll just--in
    yielding back to the, to the chairman. I don't know where you
    were on January 6th. Most of us were here. A lot of us had a
    friend, a guy named Howie Liebengood, who was a Capitol Police
    Officer who died as a result of January 6th, whose widow Serena
    is one of my constituents.
        When I hear somebody, anybody talk about what happened here
    as a false flag or a hoax, it's insulting to those of us who
    were here. It's particularly insulting to those who lost loved
    ones that day. I yield back.
        Senator Scott. [Presiding.] Senator Sullivan.
        Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, I'm going to cover kind of the topics that
    you and I talked about in my office a couple days ago. First of
    all, I like to ask nominees, maybe I'll ask all of you. Billy
    Mitchell was testifying in front of the--I think it was Senate
    Armed Services Committee, the father of the U.S. Air Force in
    the mid 1930's. He was talking about a certain place in the
    world. He called it the most strategic place on the planet, and
    whoever controlled that place would control the world. Mr.
    Lohmeier, I'll start with you. As an Air Force guy, you know
    where Billy Mitchell was talking about?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do, Senator.
        Senator Sullivan. What place was he talking about?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It was the State of Alaska.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Can I get that confirmation from
    the two other witnesses?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator, you can.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Sullivan. Most strategic place in the world. Great.
    Good. You guys are starting out really well here. Thank you,
    and our adversaries, also see it as quite strategic.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Sullivan. This is a depiction of the Russian and
    Chinese incursions into our ADIZ and into our EEZ in the last
    two and a half years. I'm going to flip that over and show you
    the numbers. It's like several.
        That's in the last two and a half years. Pretty remarkable.
    Doesn't make a lot of news in the Lower 48, our airspace,
    northern airspace. The green, the green ones are depictions of
    joint strategic bomber task forces and joint United States--or
    I'm sorry, Russia, Chinese naval incursion. So, they're doing
    joint ops in the Northern Pacific and Alaska. Just a couple--2
    weeks ago.
        So, Mr. Lohmeier, I want--you're a former F-15 pilot. Can
    you put the other slide up? When you do an intercept mission,
    say from Alaska, how tough are those missions? Our guys do them
    all the time. Every one of those incursions, we intercepted
    them with F-22s, F-16s, F-35. How tough of a mission if you're
    flying from JBER or Eielson Air Force Base out to the ADIZ
    here, is that a tough mission?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. The seat in the F-15 and even
    in our newest fighters, isn't comfortable when you're spending
    hours in there hitting the tanker multiple times.
        Senator Sullivan. So, you're hitting a tanker probably four
    or five times just to go do the intercept. Correct?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Correct.
        Senator Sullivan. Sometimes, in the middle of the night, in
    February, you're doing an intercept up there. If you're in a
    single engine F-16 intercepting Russian Bear Bombers in the
    middle of the night in February, and you got to punch out, you
    lose an engine, how likely are you going to survive in that----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, those are incredibly high-risk
    missions, and we've got great men and women who put their necks
    on the line every day doing just exactly what you've described.
    Especially if you're having to punch out in that environment,
    you're not in a good position.
        Senator Sullivan. No. So, what the NORTHCOM Commander and
    the INDOPACOM Commander and even the CNO of the Navy has said
    we need more infrastructure up here to support these missions
    because they keep saying we're going to--the Russians and
    Chinese are going to keep doing this even more. So, would you
    work with me and this committee on those goals? We're looking
    at Adak as a Navy Base with two 8,000-foot airstrips. We're
    looking at a hangar up at Utqiagvik, that's Barrow, to be able
    to station search and rescue operations, or Galena, that was a
    former Air Force Base.
        Would you work with me and this committee on looking at
    that kind of infrastructure that can support the men and women
    in Alaska who are literally on the front lines of great power
    competition doing these kinds of missions. You know, just a
    couple weeks ago, hard missions. Our military up in Alaska do
    such a great job. But can you support me in this committee in
    working on those infrastructure projects that the two combatant
    commanders in this region INDOPACOM and NORTHCOM have testified
    that they need?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I share your interest in this
    area. This is in many respects a cornerstone of our projection
    of power into the Indo-Pacific Theater. You have my commitment
    to work very closely with you on what the Secretary and I are
    trying to do from a basing perspective, an infrastructure
    perspective in the Department of the Air Force, if confirmed.
        Senator Sullivan. Let me ask one final question. The
    secretary nominee in his testimony also committed to me, the
    Air Force has committed to me and this committee for about
    eight or 9 years now to get more tankers up at Eielson. The
    last Secretary of the Air Force did, the previous Secretary of
    the Air Force did, Democrats, Republicans.
        Can you commit to me, as the Secretary just did, to work to
    get the four KC-135s that they've been promising these brave
    men and women who need tanking capacity to go do these
    intercepts, real-world missions. No. 2, can you work with me
    and commit to me to getting those four KC-135s up to Eielson?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, if confirmed, I commit to you that I
    will work to ensure that the commitments that Dr. Meink has
    made are fulfilled.
        Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
    Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, the role of Under Secretary of Air Force is
    not a platform for ideology or grievance. It's a demanding
    leadership position that's responsible for overseeing a budget,
    personnel, institutional integrity. It requires a strategic
    vision, and really importantly, managerial experience. That is
    to say, hands-on experience managing a major organization.
        I'm at a loss to see what in your background qualifies you
    to lead or actually run the Air Force when you've never led an
    organization that approaches this one at anything like the
    scale and scope of what you would be expected to do, if you're
    confirmed.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, thanks for the opportunity to
    address that. As I mentioned in my opening statement, I've
    spent time in both the Air Force and the Space Force. I was
    trusted to be an aircraft commander on the $50 million F-15
    Eagle air superiority fighter, and then later was placed in
    command of our $18 billion space-based architecture a decade
    ago. In fact, that was my first foray into working with program
    managers, acquisition experts.
        Senator Blumenthal. Well, what is the largest number of
    people under your direct responsibility that you've----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, at the time that I finished my
    career, I was a squadron commander, and we had just over 100
    people in our unit.
        Senator Blumenthal. 100?
        Mr. Lohmeier. That's right.
        Senator Blumenthal. How many will you be responsible for if
    you are confirmed?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The Department of the Air Force is
    approximately 700,000 Active Duty guard, reserve, and civilian
    personnel.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, 100 versus 700,000. How long were
    you in charge of that squadron?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I was a squadron commander for 1 year,
    Senator.
        Senator Blumenthal. One year. Is that the standard length
    of time?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is not.
        Senator Blumenthal. Why was it shorter?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, it was cut short when I was relieved
    of my command for publishing a book that's been mentioned in
    this hearing that was advocating for a return to an apolitical
    military workplace instead of dividing troops along political
    ideological lines.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, this is very strikingly reminiscent
    of what we've heard before in these confirmation hearings,
    seemingly for the Secretary of Defense who, also in effect, was
    relieved of his responsibility when he was running a veterans
    organization, and in effect, ran it into the ground, which
    should have been a warning for all of us, as it was for me and
    others on the committee, about lack of managerial experience
    being potentially a really grave pitfall. I'm very fearful that
    we are going to see the same in others in the Department of
    Defense. There's no room for managerial misguidance or
    mistakes.
        Again, let me ask you, what in your experience qualifies
    you for this job?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you. I agree with you and share your
    concern. We have no room in the--at this critical time with the
    threats that we face for our service, secretaries and our under
    secretaries, to mismanage, to break the law, to not take the
    priorities of an Administration appropriately seriously.
        In fact, we need real leaders in place to make hard
    decisions about budgets and acquisition processes, major
    defense programs. We need them to make hard decisions about the
    nuclear modernization efforts that we have underway. If
    confirmed, I'll take that very seriously. I'm a fast learner,
    and I'll surround myself with experts, including Dr. Meink, if
    he's confirmed, to try and solve those problems for the
    Department of Air Force.
        Senator Blumenthal. Would you use Signal to----
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do use Signal, Senator?
        Senator Blumenthal. To talk to others in the Department of
    Defense or the National Security establishment about the plans
    for pilots in the Air Force to do military missions?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, one of the things I've become quite
    good at over my 15-and-a-half-year career in the Air Force and
    Space Force is understanding very well that there are sensitive
    and classified materials that should only be discussed in
    appropriate platforms. We have appropriate platforms and
    mediums for those communications.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, the answer is no?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Signal is an unclassified messaging app just
    like other apps, although it's end-to-end encrypted. So, if
    confirmed, that's something you need to take very seriously in
    those roles. Yes, Senator,
        Senator Blumenthal. Is your answer no?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My answer is that I would----
        Senator Blumenthal. Would you use Signal?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I'll abide by the law, and I'll make sure
    that any sensitive or classified communications are
    accomplished on the appropriate mediums.
        Senator Blumenthal. This is a yes or no answer.
        You would not use Signal, I assume from your answer, yes or
    no?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I will use Signal for private discussions
    that are unclassified with friends or colleagues as I always
    have.
        Senator Blumenthal. So, you would not use it to discuss
    missions that pilots in the Air Force? You're going to be----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Correct.
        Senator Blumenthal.--the Under Secretary of the Air Force,
    if----
        Senator Blumenthal.--you're confirmed----
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Easy commitment, Senator.
        Senator Blumenthal.--would be flying in hostile territory,
    such as those pilots were when the Secretary of Defense used
    Signal on two occasion to communicate about those highly
    sensitive, confidential, potentially dangerous missions,
    putting pilots at risk. You wouldn't do it. Correct?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, you have my commitment. I will not
    use Signal to discuss those things.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Senator Scott.
        Senator Scott. Thank you, Chairman.
        Well, first off, congratulations on your nominations. Your
    jobs are going to be exciting. It's going to be an--it's an
    exciting time to be part of building and making sure we have a
    great military. So, you guys are--you're all three going to do
    a great job.
        So, I just I didn't know I was supposed to come and ask for
    a military base in my State, but I've got one that's important,
    Homestead. But anyway, I just got back from Europe, and this
    has been consistent for--since I've been up here. As I talk to
    allies, they complain. They complain about two things. That
    they are trying to buy our equipment. They complain about the,
    I guess, foreign military sales process to get approval from
    the government. Then, they complain about they can't get the
    equipment quickly because our defense contractors are not on
    time.
        So, Mr. Zimmerman, can you talk about what you think we can
    do, and what you plan on doing to make it easier to make a
    decision? Because I just--we were just in Denmark, Finland, and
    Estonia, the two that we had the conversation with, all three
    of them, but a lot of it they don't understand when they are
    ally and they can't get an answer.
        I'm a business guy. What frustrates me about the government
    is just give me a stupid answer. Because if you tell them no,
    that they can go to Israel, they can go to South Korea, they
    can go to other places and buy some of the equipment they need.
    But if it's just a black hole, that doesn't make any sense.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator from my understanding from the
    issue, I think I share your frustration and understand why
    allies have thoughts about the process. If confirmed to the
    role, I understand that the way in which I would be connected
    to the FMS process is an advising role, and particularly
    looking at prioritization in both with our European allies.
        Here we are in a situation dealing with an underinvestment
    in the defense industrial base over the last several years that
    has limited the supply of what they need. So, that's a
    challenge, but I would give my best advice, if confirmed, to
    the Secretary and Under Secretary about how to prioritize
    allied security needs through the FMS system.
        Senator Scott. So, you might not be involved in this, but
    it's my understanding that with our defense contractors, we pay
    for them to develop a product, and then they own the IP for
    that product. Is that true, or do you know?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I don't know the answer to that. I
    would like to get back to you about that.
        Senator Scott. Does that make sense? Just off the top of
    your head? Did that make much sense? If we for it, if our
    government pays for it with our taxpayer dollars, they own the
    IP?
        Mr. Zimmerman. It sounds like if true, it might be one of
    the challenges in the program.
        Senator Scott. So, what do you think we can do to get our
    defense contractors to fulfill the obligations that they've
    committed to? Because we hear this all from our allies all over
    the world; that our defense contractors are not meeting, not
    just with their commitments to us on time, but commitments to
    our allies for equipment that they need to make sure they can
    defend, which is exactly what President Trump wants them to do,
    be able to defend themselves first.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, it's a great question, and if
    confirmed, I would do all that I could within the scope of the
    ISA portfolio and how it touches on FMS to ensure that the
    process is as painless and seamless as possible. It is very
    important for our allies and for the Administration's goal of
    burden sharing to have an efficient FMS process.
        Senator Scott. Okay. Thanks. You-all three are going to do
    a great job. Thanks, Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Scott. Senator King is
    next, and he is graciously yielded to Senator Kelly. So,
    Senator Kelly, you're recognized.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Senator King. Mr. Lohmeier, you recently made a
    post that seemed to indicate Russia was justified in its
    invasion of Ukraine because Russia feared NATO expansion. This
    isn't just untrue. It's also the exact kind of misinformation
    that Russia pushed to justify them rolling troops and tanks
    across the border into Ukraine and bombing Ukrainian cities.
        So, Mr. Lohmeier, I want to be very direct here. In your
    opinion, was Russia justified in its invasion of Ukraine?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks, Senator Kelly, for taking the time to
    meet with me a week and a half ago. In answer to your question,
    I'll say as directly back as I can as well, and in respect, I
    don't believe I used the word justified in my post. However, I
    am a bit of a historian. I like context, and what I've always
    said publicly is that all heads of State have to make
    determinations for their own security. So, when I say something
    like that, whether it's with Vladimir Putin or any head of
    State, I'm saying that they are entitled to make those
    decisions whether we agree with them or not.
        Now, it's a bit outside of the lane of the Under Secretary
    of the Air Force, of course, whose role as the chief management
    officer will be to organize training and equip forces for the
    fight in--for any given Administration to meet combat and
    commander needs?
        Senator Kelly. Well, I'll give you that. That the post did
    not say that. But you did post an article by John Mearsheimer
    that said why the Ukraine crisis is the West's fault. You did
    not say that was your opinion. So, I'm going to ask you the
    question, again. In your opinion, was Russia justified in its
    invasion of Ukraine?
        Mr. Lohmeier. For context, which always, of course,
    Senator, as you aware, matters a great deal. That was an
    article that was written by John Mearsheimer, an international
    relations scholar, in 2014. It was a comment about Russia's
    annexation of Crimea in 2014, and some of the history leading
    up to that. It was not an article that had any bearing upon
    what happened in the decade that followed, per se, but it was
    an international relation's academic piece that talked about
    the annexation of Crimea.
        His opinion in that article, and this is a very insightful
    article, in fact, traces through the history of native
    expansion since it was created. It's, again, an academic piece.
    It's something that we study at strategy----
        Senator Kelly. Crimea was part of Ukraine. In my view,
    still is part of Ukraine.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, and the point I just make in
    bringing that up is that the opinion that was shared in that
    post about that article had to do with past conflict and
    implications for the ways in which allies interact on the world
    stage and how that influences the decisions that heads of State
    make. It was not in any way intended to excuse the behavior of
    any head of State, including President Putin.
        Senator Kelly. So, now I've got two questions. So, the
    title of the paper was, ``Why the Ukraine Crisis Is The West
    Fault.'' Do you agree with that premise?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It's an enticing title. Again, it was
    pertaining to decisions that were being made a decade prior to
    the conflict that you're asking about. It's an incredibly
    informative academic work that is based in international
    relations theory. I very much like the paper and would still
    recommend to people today if they're interested in
    understanding the conflict in the region. It's a rich resource
    of information.
        Senator Kelly. Do you agree that the Ukraine crisis is the
    West's fault?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, because that's far too simplistic. Again,
    global politics is a messy and complicated affair. What I will
    say is that it's very clear, a couple of years ago, Russia
    invaded Ukraine, and Ukraine's been on the defense of trying to
    fight that war. Of course, it's had bipartisan support in this
    Congress.
        Senator Kelly. So, was Russia justified in invading
    Ukraine?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, with respect, I've not said that.
        Senator Kelly. Well, that's why I'm asking you the
    question.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I know you are, and I really--the reason I'm
    hesitating shouldn't be taken or interpreted to imply and
    answer one way or the other. I really--I like context. I don't
    like yes and nos, and I don't like soundbite media. I'll say
    that I believe that heads of State retain the right to make
    decisions on who they'll go to war with. That's not something I
    decide. That's not something even the United States or its
    leaders get to decide even as much as we want to weigh in on
    those positions. I can say, though, for certainty that I'm
    grateful----
        Senator Kelly. But it sounds like you think it's okay for
    one of our adversaries to invade one of our allies.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I did not say that. What I will say is that
    I'm grateful that there are currently efforts underway by this
    Administration to try and seek a peaceful resolution of that
    conflict. I think it's time that it ended.
        Senator Kelly. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
    Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Senator Tuberville.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
    gentlemen, for willingness to serve.
        Mr. Zimmerman, since March 15th, CENTCOM has forces that
    have conducted a sustained campaign targeting the Houthis
    terrorist organization in Yemen to restore freedom of
    navigation in American deterrence. As of April 27th, CENTCOM
    has struck over 800 targets. These targets have killed hundreds
    of Houthis' fighters and numerous Hootie leaders, including
    Senior Hootie Missile and UAV officials. Mr. Zimmerman, in your
    assessment, have U.S. operations against the Houthis been a
    success?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I support the Administration's
    forcible approach toward the Houthis beginning in the early
    days of the Administration with the executive order that called
    for the elimination of the threat of the Houthis with allies
    and designating them as a foreign terrorist organization. I
    don't think I have access to the, to the classified information
    that I would like to have to make an assessment about the
    efficacy of the strikes, but I support what the Administration
    is trying to do.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you.
        Mr. Overbaugh, one of the organizations you'll help
    oversee, if you are confirmed, is the Missile and Space
    Intelligence Center, we call MSIC, which is a component of DIA,
    and located in my State at Huntsville, Alabama. MSIC provides a
    world-class analysis on the performance of foreign weapons
    systems, which is critical to ensuring our warfighters dominate
    the battlefield against our adversaries.
        Mr. Overbaugh, are you familiar with MSIC and MSIC's
    analysis? If so, can you talk a little bit about how important
    this mission is?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I am familiar with MSIC, and
    particularly their role in feeding quality intelligence into
    other entities like DIA, to ensure that we have an accurate
    threat picture. I think even more important is the potential
    for MSIC to play a key role in ensuring we understand the
    adversarial threat as it relates to ensuring that our Golden
    Dome is as effective as it possibly can be.
        Senator Tuberville. Have you had the opportunity to visit
    MSIC headquarters in Huntsville?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Huntsville, yes. MSIC, no, not yet, Senator.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Hope you get too soon. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Lohmeier, you have an absolutely outstanding, unique
    career path as a respect to military officer. Thank you for
    your service. You've got a breadth of experience in both the
    Air Force and Space Force, which is very uncommon, but none of
    those experiences were in managing large budgets. Why should
    you be trusted now with such a heavy responsibility at a time
    when we are taking fiscal responsibility more seriously, thank
    goodness, than ever before, and while there is a growing demand
    from the American people that we have a clean audit of the
    Defense Department?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks, Senator. I'm glad I get to readdress
    this. While it's true that I don't personally have extensive
    experience with a large budget in an organization or
    acquisition experience, I have sound judgment. I've
    demonstrated it throughout my life. I'm a fast learner.
        Secretary Meink, if he's confirmed, has demonstrated that
    you can pass 16 or 17 clean audits at the National
    Reconnaissance Office. He'll be a phenomenal leader to work
    with on this problem in the Department of the Air Force. What I
    can say is that we've got exceptional professionals who have
    been trying Administration after Administration to solve our
    budget problems, our acquisition problems in the Department of
    the Air Force. Many of them have had extensive acquisition and
    budgeting experience. But that doesn't mean you're able to
    solve the problems well.
        So, if confirmed, what I can commit to this committee and
    to the American people is that I'm interested in making data-
    driven decisions. I'm interested in exercising keen judgment,
    discernment about these budget decisions, and coming to the
    right decisions that I believe the American people will be
    grateful for and trust. Doing that in concert with Secretary
    Meink in support of the President's priorities and in support
    of the Secretary of Defense's priorities.
        Senator Tuberville. Thank you.
        Your knowledge will be very important moving into space.
    You have a lot of experience in that area. We look forward to
    working with you in that area because as we know, it's going to
    be a much, much more important part of our military in the very
    near future. Thank you, gentlemen. Look forward to confirming
    you.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Tuberville. I would
    mention to members a vote is going on on the floor. I think we
    can possibly finish this hearing before that vote ends. Senator
    King.
        Senator King. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, I deeply respect your career in the Air Force
    and the Space Force. But to followup on Senator Tuberville's
    question, my concern is that the Air Force, and particularly
    your position, is going to be responsible for two-thirds of the
    modernization of the nuclear triad. The Sentinel piece is
    looking like the most consequential civil works project that
    the Pentagon or perhaps in this whole country has ever
    undertaken. It's already in a Nunn-McCurdy breach.
        So, I'm not satisfied with saying you're data-driven, and
    you're going to hire good people. My concern is, I mean, you're
    the boss, and you would be, if you're confirmed. I'm just
    uncomfortable. I'm not talking about past tweets or books or
    anything else. I'm talking about the future, and that is the
    management of probably the most complex and important defense
    project that's ever been undertaken by the Pentagon.
        Try to reassure me. I mean, a great center fielder for the
    Red Sox is not necessarily qualified to be general manager.
    Your service is important, but you're talking--we're talking
    about these critically important acquisitions projects that are
    intensely managerial. Try to reassure me, if you can.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, thank you, Senator. I agree with your
    concern. I share your concern for the criticality of the
    Sentinel Program, concern over the Nunn-McCurdy breach that's
    experienced. Modernization of the nuclear enterprise is, of
    course, a priority of mine. So, here's the way in which I can
    try and reassure you, as I have throughout the rest of the
    hearing.
        I've been entrusted throughout my entire career with both
    leadership of men and women in uniform, as well as being
    entrusted with safeguarding and employing exceptionally
    exquisite and expensive weapon systems, both in the Air Force,
    in the F-15C and in the space-based infrared system, the space-
    based missile warning architecture, an $18 billion
    architecture. I've worked with acquirers' program managers in
    that process.
        This is not a question of whether or not someone has had
    the qualifications before to manage the Defense Department,
    because who in their most human beings have never had that
    experience? In fact, this is a question of scale or scope, and
    I'll say that I've always been faithful to the trust that's
    been committed to me, even though the scale has been much
    smaller.
        I'll say, humbly, that I believe I'm up to this challenge.
    I'm well qualified for this job. I'm air-minded and space-
    minded, and I understand very well the threats, especially that
    we face from our peer competitor in China, and so, thank you.
    That's my best attempt to say, Senator. I'm grateful for the
    opportunity, but I'm also humbled by it, and very concerned
    about it as well. I look forward, if confirmed, to doing my
    utmost very best to manage those very serious programs.
        Senator King. I appreciate that.
        Mr. Overbaugh, every time, and I like Senator Cotton, I
    also serve on the Intelligence Committee. To me, the most
    important quality for any intelligence official is the
    willingness to tell the truth to the boss, even if it isn't
    what they want to hear. Dan Coats, former DNI, said the job of
    the intelligence community is to find the truth and tell the
    truth.
        Will you commit to me that you are willing to walk into the
    Oval Office or walk into the office of the Secretary of Defense
    and say this is the intelligence that we have about this
    particular problem that contradicts the policy desires of the
    President or the Secretary, or the Head of the Joint Chiefs?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I can absolutely commit to that. I
    agree with you wholeheartedly, that seeking the truth is one of
    the most important, if not the most important components of an
    intelligence professional's job.
        Senator King. If you look back on recent history, some of
    our real disasters have been caused by slanted, or what I call,
    cooked intelligence. That's to be avoided. Simple question. Did
    Russia start the war in Ukraine by invading?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, it's a military fact that Russia
    invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
        Senator King. Thank you.
        There's one challenge about intelligence that we've
    learned, particularly in Afghanistan, and then again in
    Ukraine, and that is the analysis of the will to fight of a
    population. We blew it in both cases. We overestimated the
    Afghan's will to fight, and had the disaster of the end of that
    war. Then, we did not--we underestimated the Ukrainian's will
    to fight, and all the intelligence was that it would--you know,
    the Russian would be in Kyiv in 2 weeks.
        I challenge you, and I know the Department has done serious
    work on this, to pay attention to that because that, for
    example, will be a factor in our policy decision about Taiwan.
    So, it's not an easy question. It's not as easy as counting
    tanks from a satellite, but it's nonetheless an incredibly
    important intelligence challenge. So, I hope that's something
    you'll pay some attention to.
        Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I will, and apologize, I see that
    we're over time, but I do want to address this. I mentioned it
    in my opening statement about the importance of evaluating and
    questioning the assumptions that we use to make the assessments
    that we make, and examining the frameworks to determine how
    much they are may be influenced by personal bias or
    bureaucratic bias, political influence, or any other type of
    interference, which would inhibit our ability to provide our
    decisionmakers with the very best picture of adversarial threat
    to include, which I personally think is one of the most
    important components of enemy capability is will to fight.
        Senator King. Thank you.
        Find the truth and tell the truth. That's what we're
    looking for. Mr. Zimmerman. I'll submit some questions for the
    record.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator. Senator
    Budd.
        Senator Budd. Thank you, Chairman, and, again,
    congratulations to each of you. Thanks for the family and
    friends to be here today.
        Mr. Lohmeier, are you familiar with the strategic basing
    process?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Somewhat, Senator.
        Senator Budd. Okay, great.
        Last month, the Department of Air Force transmitted its
    plan to Congress for the sustainment and recapitalization of
    the Air National Guard fighter fleet. Now, it was the result of
    much analysis and careful planning. It's this document right
    here. Have you had a chance to read this?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I have not, Senator.
        Senator Budd. Selfridge Air National Guard Base in
    Michigan, is receiving 15 EXs, and that is not part of this
    plan, which I can guess will change things for the Air Force's
    frontline units. Not the Guard units, but the frontline units.
    So, as an example, Seymour Johnson will have to train these A-
    10 pilots on the platform of the F-15 and the mission using
    their F-15 Eagles. You flew the F-15, correct?
        Mr. Lohmeier. C models. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Budd. Well, that's a large unplanned increase in
    flying training compared to the simulator-based differences
    training for transitioning currently qualified F-15 pilots to
    the EX model. So, I want to paraphrase a statement from the Air
    Force about the training capacity down at Seymour Johnson.
        ``F-15 program flying training requirements will jump by
    greater than 50 percent in Fiscal Year 2027 and 2028, and
    currently, the Air Force has no training-coded aircraft
    capacity to meet that requirement without reflow of combat-
    coded F-15E. The Air Force is being forced to examine
    drastically cutting the F-15 syllabus length to meet those
    requirements. This creates risk on both quality and basic
    course air crew graduates and on-combat air forces that will
    receive aircrew with potentially subpar combat airmanship
    skills.''
        Just to be clear, that statement was given by the Air Force
    in February, and that's before Selfridge basing decision was
    made. So, if confirmed, what will you do to ensure that the 4th
    Fighter Wing at Seymour Johnson Base has what they need to make
    ends meet with this additional training requirement?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I'm really glad you brought all of
    this up. You have my attention. I understood everything you've
    said. It's of great interest. I'll say that I'm very familiar
    with the missions being flown out of Seymour Johnson. In fact,
    I'll just say publicly, it matters a great deal to the Air
    Force and the American people that we had over 80 drones shot
    down in the Middle East this past year, over a 6-month period,
    by a unit out of Seymour Johnson, and we have dozens----
        Senator Budd. They just arrived at that very moment.
        Mr. Lohmeier. They performed potentially mass casualty
    events and dozens of these men and women suit up every day out
    of Seymour Johnson doing an absolutely critical mission in
    defense of the homeland.
        So, you have my commitment that, if confirmed, I'll look
    forward to working with Dr. Meink, if he's confirmed, to
    looking at these things in a nonpartisan way, these basing
    decisions, and the proper force structure, and bed down of
    forces. But I'm interested in learning more from you about
    Seymour Johnson, in particular.
        Senator Budd. Thank you for that answer.
        Just to be clear, if confirmed, you'll be responsible for
    assisting the Secretary in organizing training and equipping
    the Air Force. Correct?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Thank you, and, in fact, as we've
    mentioned, that's exactly what the role of the Under Secretary
    of the Air Force is, that's our chief prerogative is
    organizing, training, and equipping Air and Space Forces to
    provide to our combatant commanders.
        Senator Budd. Thank you for that.
        So, if confirmed, I look forward to hearing the plan soon
    on how the Air Force is going to solve this issue, and at
    Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. Thank you-all, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Budd. Senator
    Duckworth.
        Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, you know as well as I do from your military
    service that upholding good order and discipline is a
    foundation for our professional fighting force. Lethality
    relies on a honed practice of servicemembers following lawful
    orders. I, myself, even though as a progressive serving in the
    military, did not agree with President Bush's decision to look
    for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when we should have
    been destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan. Still volunteered
    to go and proud of my service to this day.
        Sometimes, servicemembers have to serve against their own
    personal opinions. Circumventing commanders on the battlefield
    in real time could lead to life-or-death mistakes. As former
    Secretary of Defense matters wrote, officers must carry out a
    policy to the best of their ability, even when they might
    disagree with that policy. To that end, I have questions about
    your commitment to this core principle and the troubling
    signals that your confirmation would send to those in uniform.
        You claim to have only written your book and gone public
    after the Inspector General concluded that your complaint had
    no merit. But we all know that there are other channels
    available to servicemembers concerned about commander decisions
    or policy choices beyond the IG. Before you chose to write your
    book or speak out in the media about policies that concerned
    you, did you consider being a whistleblower to your Senators or
    Representatives, which would've been protected under title 10,
    section 1034, yes or no? Did you consider?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Duckworth. You did consider it? That is news to us.
    I ask that you present this Committee any correspondence that
    you may have had with Members of Congress.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Copy. I'll do that, Senator.
        [The information referred to follows:]
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
        Did you file an article 138 complaint, which under the
    Uniform Code of Military Justice, allows servicemembers to seek
    redress for a wrong conducted by a commander?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I did not, Senator.
        Senator Duckworth. Okay. So, why did you not?
        Mr. Lohmeier. There are many months in question, the
    timeframe that we're talking about here, but at the time that
    we separated after I had been relieved of my command, and there
    was a command directed investigation about me as well as the
    general officer that had relieved me of my command, it was a
    traumatic period, a hard period of hardship for my family and
    my children.
        Senator Duckworth. No, I'm not talking about that. I'm
    talking about when you were writing the book and you were still
    in uniform. You chose to write--you made the decision to write
    the book because you said there was no other way for you to
    address your concerns. You said that you did reach out to
    Members of Congress, which is news to me, but you did not file
    an Article 138 complaint prior to writing your book and
    speaking in public.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand. I misunderstood your question,
    Senator. My answer to your previous question, you asked if I
    had considered reaching out to Members of Congress, and the
    answer to that question was yes.
        Senator Duckworth. Did you do it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I had communication with Members of Congress,
    and I'd be happy to provide that to you. I exhausted all of the
    means that I understood available to me. I'd been counseling
    with the Base IG, Space Force IG, Base legal, Pentagon Public
    Affairs, and the entire chain of command to include members of
    the Joint Chiefs before I published the book.
        Senator Duckworth. So, nobody talked to you about Article
    138 complaint, which is a recourse that you could have taken?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If that was discussed specifically Article
    138, I don't recall the circumstances as to why I chose what I
    did at that time regarding Article 138, specifically,
        Senator Duckworth. I'm concerned that you didn't follow
    through on all of the recourses that were available to you. You
    are allowed to have your personal views, but there are rules
    governing how public servicemembers can be in opposition to
    lawful orders with your actions, you signal to those under your
    command that it is okay to be insubordinate. As Peter Feaver, a
    scholar who served in George W. Bush's National Security
    Council has written, and I quote, ``Military officers who
    believe that the policymaking process is heading in a bad
    direction have ample recourse to advise within the chain of
    command if their advice is not heeded. The country would not be
    better served by senior officers provoking a civil military
    crisis to advertise their policy differences with civilian
    leaders.''
        You were relieved of command, not for your beliefs, but for
    how you chose to express them on Active Duty while holding a
    position of authority over others. That is not persecution,
    that is accountability, and if as a former commander you cannot
    recount the basic recourses available to servicemembers, how
    can we expect you to lead airmen and guardians? You were
    relieved of command, not for your beliefs, but for how you
    chose to express them on Active Duty while holding a position
    of authority over others.
        So, if it's true that you followed these steps, you still
    decided to circumvent the chain of command while still on
    Active Duty to speak up publicly without informing your
    leadership. You could have resigned and spoken out, or
    continued serving and kept your mouth shut, but instead, you
    decided to continue serving and violate your professional
    ethics. You are allowed to have those personal views. But there
    are rules governing how servicemembers can be in opposition to
    lawful orders.
        So, I sort of feel like you broke the rules. There are ways
    to do this, and you chose to instead circumvent those rules
    that sets the standards for the people that you are about to
    take charge of to continue to circumvent the rules, and that is
    not conducive to good order and discipline within the military.
    Do you understand that? That is my concern.
        Mr. Lohmeier. If Chairman Wicker's okay with me responding,
    I'd be happy to.
        Chairman Wicker. Sure. I think the question is; do you
    understand that that's her point of view?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand your view, Senator. I think in
    value or in principle, you and I agree on many things that
    you've said. I will reject the idea that I did anything
    unlawful, unethical, or publicly contrary to--I never publicly
    criticized my chain of command. I never publicly was
    politically partisan while acting in an official capacity. Both
    of those allegations were the reasons I was relieved of my
    command that I wasn't found guilty of either of those things.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you, and thank you, Senator
    Duckworth. I think the distinguished ranking member has a
    followup question.
        Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Lohmeier, earlier this year, it came to my attention
    that current serving military personnel have been receiving
    emails, threatening them with being fired for supporting the
    current DOD policies. One email that was sent to a military
    officer with the subject line, ``Clean House,'' states, ``With
    the incoming Administration looking to remove disloyal,
    corrupt, traitorous liberal officers, such as yourself, we will
    certainly be putting your name onto the list of those personnel
    to be removed. We know you support the woke, DEI policies and
    will ensure you never again influence anyone in the future. You
    and--'' the redacted spouse's name--``will be lucky if you are
    able to correct your military retirement.''
        Mr. Lohmeier, if you became aware of someone sending
    threatening emails to currently serving officers, what would
    you do in your capacity?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, I think the way in which
    leaders go about communicating with their troops matters a
    great deal. Having been in command, there's no way to retain
    the respect of your troops if you don't communicate
    respectfully to men and women of every background.
        I don't particularly appreciate the tone in which that
    email was written. I don't know who wrote it. I'm not familiar
    with the background of that email, but I will say once again
    that I share this committee's commitment to an apolitical
    military. I don't believe witch hunts are healthy in the
    military. I think that unity is our strength. I believe that
    when we start to go down the path of discussing partisan
    politics and ideology, it divides men and women. That's why the
    American people tend to be so divided. They have a full range
    of expression of these ideas.
        Our uniform wearers, to Senator Duckworth's point, ought to
    be focused on their mission and not being caught up in this
    kind of rhetoric. But if these kinds of things came to my
    attention, then of course they deserve attention. Every man and
    woman in uniform deserves to be treated with respect.
        Senator Reed. Do you believe it would be disqualifying
    firing for someone on Active service in the military as an
    officer listed or civilian if they sent such an email?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Notionally, I think the context always
    matters, Senator, and I've expressed that I don't necessarily--
    I wouldn't write an email with that tone, personally. I'll
    speak for myself. What's qualifying and disqualifying at a very
    high level is whether or not people are acting ethically and
    legally, upholding the oath to defend and support the
    Constitution and following the lawful orders of those that have
    been appointed over them to lead them. That's what every
    enlisted and officer, troupe across every branch of the
    military is taught to believe in.
        It's that, ``Hey, whatever baggage I bring to my service in
    uniform, politically, ideologically, I leave that at the
    doorstep. I get the same ugly haircut as those next to me. I
    wear the same uniform, bleed the same color, focus on the same
    mission, and we care about readiness and lethality.''
        Senator Reed. Well, I too believe that context is
    important. If you look at the context, particularly your
    comments since you were left the service, they created an
    impression of someone committed to, frankly, a reprisal,
    revenge, weeding out from the service those people who did not
    ascribe to your thoughts. You said it in your--in so many
    words, in your X filings and in your book.
        I find it very difficult that suddenly you will have this
    transition, this enlightenment that will disabuse you of all
    those notions and make you someone who you claim today is
    apolitical, not concerned about the extracurricular activities
    of people in terms of their political positions, et cetera.
    That's totally inconsistent what you've done over the last 4
    years. I think you've made that evident today.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, am I allowed to respond?
        Senator Reed. Of course. That's the system here.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I'll say briefly that I really do believe--
    one, I believe that everyone who's been in this hearing
    understands that I'm authentic, and try and be true in what I
    say. Second, I believe that every man and woman that's ever
    worked with me would be glad to welcome me back into public
    service.
        Senator Reed. Does that include the people that you've by
    name threatened to----
        Mr. Lohmeier. I've not by name threatened anybody, Senator.
        Senator Reed. Well, you've certainly indicated your
    displeasure with lots of people by name.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Well, I'm displeased with the cowardly
    behavior of many people, but I've never threatened anybody. I
    think that we have many great men and women in uniform, high
    and low, who all have the right to try their best to serve this
    country faithfully. I don't necessarily agree with all the
    decisions they make, but I'm not a vindictive person. I think
    that men and women in uniform will be very grateful to see me
    come back into service, if I'm confirmed.
        Senator Reed. Well, thank you for your testimony,
    gentlemen. I will have questions for Mr. Overbaugh and Mr.
    Zimmerman. Thank you very much, sir.
        Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. This concludes
    today's hearing. I'd like to thank our witnesses for their
    testimony. For the information of members, questions for the
    record will be due to the committee within two business days of
    the conclusion of this hearing, which is right now we are
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]

                             ------

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier by
    Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]
                            Questions and Responses
                          duties and responsibilities
        Question. What is your understanding of the current duties and
    functions of the Under Secretary of the Air Force?
        Answer. According to Title 10, the Under Secretary shall perform
    such duties and exercise such powers as the Secretary of the Air Force
    may prescribe. To my understanding, the Under Secretary of the Air
    Force is responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Department of
    the Air Force (DAF), including the organizing, training, and equipping
    of the Department's approximately 700,000 Active Duty, Guard and
    Reserve airmen and guardians as well as Department civilians. The Under
    Secretary serves as the ``Chief Management Officer'', overseeing the
    Department's budget and directing strategy and policy development, risk
    management, acquisitions, investments and the management of human
    resources across the enterprise.
        Question. In particular, what management and leadership experience
    do you possess that you would apply to your service as Under Secretary
    of the Air Force, if confirmed?
        Answer. I have served in both the United States Air Force and the
    United States Space Force. In the former, I served as an F-15C pilot;
    in the latter, I served as a squadron commander of a space-based
    missile warning system, including a multi-billion-dollar satellite
    architecture responsible for the security of the U.S. homeland. In both
    of these roles, I have accumulated a deep background in strategy,
    policy, operations, and issues relating to human resources of our
    airmen and guardians. This includes the welfare of the servicemembers
    and their families.
        Question. If confirmed to be the Under Secretary of the Air Force,
    what role would you establish for yourself in the overall supervision
    of the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force and the Air Force General
    Counsel?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force
    and the Air Force General Counsel report directly to the Secretary of
    the Air Force. If confirmed, I would look forward to working closely
    with them in realizing the vision of the Secretary and synchronizing
    the Department's efforts across all of their respective portfolios. I
    would represent their equities in senior Department of Defense
    governance bodies focused on the budget, policy, strategy, personnel
    and other matters.
        Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
    providing to the Secretary of the Air Force regarding the organization
    and operations of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would bring my extensive experience as a
    leader in both the Air and Space Forces to realize the Secretary of
    Defense's vision of reinvigorating the warrior ethos of the Department.
    Furthermore, I would leverage the relationships with my Under Secretary
    counterparts to ensure that all services are synchronized in realizing
    the Secretary's vision.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Federal ethics laws, like 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208, prohibit
    government employees from participating in matters where they, or
    certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
    relationships, have a financial interest.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
    potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
    family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
    influencing your decisionmaking?
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
    if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
    participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
        Answer. I will comply with all recusal requirements under 18 U.S.C.
    Sec.  208.
        Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    decisionmaking on the merits and exclusively in the public interest,
    without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
        Answer. Yes.
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. What would you see as your highest priorities for the
    near-term and long-term future of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Department of the Air Force faces
    several modernization requirements that need to be addressed
    simultaneously. This includes nuclear modernization, which I believe is
    long overdue. The Air Force maintains two legs of the nuclear triad and
    a substantial portion of its command and control. Ensuring our nuclear
    deterrence is unquestioned is a top priority. Additionally, we must
    ensure our conventional capabilities are modernized for the high-end
    fight. This includes the Next-Gen Air Dominance (NGAD) program and a
    resilient space architecture that denies any so-called ``first-mover
    advantage.''
        As the Department moves forward on these modernization efforts for
    the long-term, I acknowledge that both the Air and Space Force must be
    ready to ``fight tonight'' with what we already have in our arsenal.
    This means that--in the near-term--I will prioritize the readiness of
    our airmen and guardians and restore a warrior ethos throughout the
    Department.
        Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
    challenges you would face if confirmed as Under Secretary of the Air
    Force?
        Answer. If confirmed, I suspect that the modernization of the
    nuclear portfolio and ensuring the resilience of our space-based
    architecture will be the most pressing challenges.
        Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
    challenges, if confirmed?
        Answer. For nuclear modernization, I plan on executing the vision
    of the Secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed in this role, I believe
    that my greatest contribution will be on communicating that nuclear
    modernization is not an option; it is the very foundation of our
    national security strategy--and we must get it right. This will require
    more than just an all-of DAF effort, or even an all-of-DoD effort; this
    requires buy-in from Congress as well as the many communities across
    the country that host these capabilities. I look forward to working
    with this Committee and this Congress, as well as civil leaders across
    the country, to prioritize this.
        On resilient space architectures, I believe that we must continue
    to build partnerships with the commercial sector, leveraging what is
    available and only building what we absolutely must.
                           national defense strategy
        Question. The 2022 NDS outlines that the United States faces a
    rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the continued threat from rogue
    regimes and global terrorism. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the NDS
    Commission testified in July 2024 that China, Russia, Iran, and North
    Korea have formed an ``axis of aggressors'', supporting each other's
    military aggression and illegal wars.
        What is your assessment of the military threat posed by the
    People's Republic of China?
        Answer. I strongly believe that China poses the greatest military
    threat to our forces. While the United States was focused on countering
    violent extremists in the Middle East, China took advantage of the last
    two decades by modernizing its forces and learning from the successes
    and failures of the U.S. military. Ensuring that our modernization
    timelines are ahead of theirs is crucial. If confirmed, I commit to
    assisting the Secretary and the Department on shortening those
    timelines.
        Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
    Russia?
        Though I have not been fully briefed on the Russian military
    threat, evidence in open-source reporting suggests that Russia
    continues to be an acute threat to Europe and our many partners and
    allies there. While the military threat is real, I am perhaps more
    troubled by the pursuit of asymmetric advantages in space, cyber and
    electromagnetic warfare.
        Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
    collusion among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea?
        Answer. Based on what is publicly available, I have become
    concerned with the growing cooperation among these actors. This has
    been exhibited specifically in the conflict in Ukraine, to include
    soldiers from North Korea and drones coming from Iran and China. If
    faced alone, the U.S. maintains overmatch, but growing cooperation
    allows this group to cover down on shortfalls in each country's
    capabilities. If confirmed, I commit to assisting the Secretary in
    organizing, training, and equipping our airmen and guardians to ensure
    advantages based on this collusion are never realized.
        Question. In 2024, the Air Force announced a refocus on ``Great
    Power Competition,'' with a series of reorganizations intended to
    modernize force structure and force design, to align to the 2022 NDS.
        In your view, has the GPC initiative been successful?
        Answer. To my understanding, the Secretary of Defense has directed
    a pause in the implementation of the Department's initiatives to ``re-
    optimize'' for Great Power Competition. I have not been fully briefed
    on the progress made in those efforts to this point. If confirmed, I
    look forward to reviewing the progress and making a threat-informed
    analysis of any future efforts in this vein. I commit to sharing the
    results of that assessment with this Committee and this Congress.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the Air Force's role in
    competing with and countering China?
        Answer. In my opinion, the role of the Department is to achieve a
    level of readiness, capability, and capacity that will deter China from
    pursuing military aggression to achieve its national security
    objectives. This requires an unquestionable nuclear deterrent and a
    conventional force able to achieve effects for the joint force anytime,
    anywhere. No joint military operation can be conducted without some
    element of the Department of the Air Force--a claim no other department
    can make.
        Question. Is the Air Force adequately sized, structured, and
    resourced to implement the current strategy and the associated
    operational plans? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I have not been fully briefed on the size, structure, and
    resourcing of the Department. However, based on what is publicly
    available, I am concerned with the fact that our Air Force fleets are
    smaller than they have ever been and that their average age, in most
    cases, is older than desired. Lower mission capable rates are reported
    frequently and the costs of maintaining aging fleets keeps resources
    from our modernization efforts.
        Question. What are your primary lessons learned from observing
    operations in Ukraine and the Middle East that the Air Force must
    consider in its modernization efforts?
        Answer. There are three lessons I have taken away from what is
    reported in the conflict in Ukraine that are of importance to the
    Department. First, the increased proliferation and usage of unmanned
    systems--and their successes--mean we must analyze what the proper mix
    of our manned and unmanned Air Force fleet needs to be. Second, the
    resilience of our space-based architecture needs to be a focus area, as
    actors are becoming more adept at jamming position, navigation and
    timing services, like those provided by our GPS constellations. Third,
    the contests in the electromagnetic spectrum mean the Department will
    need to re-evaluate our investments there.
        Question. Does the Air Force have the requisite analytic
    capabilities and tools to support you, if confirmed, in evaluating the
    Air Force's force structure and sizing strategies to ensure that it can
    and will generate forces that are manned, trained, and equipped to
    execute current plans and strategies? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I do not have enough information to make a judgment on the
    soundness of our analytic capabilities and tools. However, if
    confirmed, I commit to reviewing those within the Department,
    conducting my own assessment, and will commit to sharing the results of
    that assessment with this Committee.
        Question. If confirmed, how will you address any gaps or shortfalls
    in the Air Force's ability to meet the demands placed on it by the
    operational plans that implement the current strategy?
        Answer. I have not received briefings regarding operational plans
    or the Air Force's ability to meet the demands therein. However, as a
    private observer, the small fleet sizes, the ages of those fleets, and
    the mission capable rates of those fleets are concerning. If confirmed,
    I commit to assisting the Secretary in addressing those issues and will
    be a vocal champion for the resources needed to solve them.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes or adjustments would you make
    in the Air Force's implementation of the current strategy?
        Answer. While I applaud the Department's efforts to focus their two
    Services and the Secretariat on high-end conflict and competition, I
    have not been fully briefed on the implementation. I understand there
    has been a pause directed by the Secretary of Defense on some of these
    efforts. If confirmed, I plan on working with the Secretary to evaluate
    the efficacy of current efforts, analyzing any proposed efforts that
    are currently on pause, and sharing the results of my assessment with
    this Committee.
        Question. How would you characterize your familiarity with the
    civilian leaders of the militaries of other nations and multi-national
    and international air power-focused consultative forums? If confirmed,
    on which leaders and forums would you focus your engagement with a view
    to advancing the interests of the Air Force?
        Answer. While my familiarity with civilian leaders of the
    militaries of other nations is not substantial--given my years of being
    a private citizen since leaving the U.S. Space Force--I recognize the
    importance of leveraging these relationships to ensure shared security
    objectives are met throughout the world. The acute threat posed by
    Russia demands that we maintain a very tight military relationship with
    our NATO allies and other partners who face unchecked aggression.
    Additionally, Chinese rhetoric and actions require that we bolster the
    relationships with our treaty allies in the Indo-Pacific as well as
    other friends and partners who are observing malign behavior in that
    region. In light of this, I would prioritize forums like the Munich
    Security Conference, the Quad, and ASEAN, and I would ensure the many
    joint and combined exercises we conduct with these partners are not
    only maintained, but strengthened.
                              air force readiness
        Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Air
    Force--across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and
    training--to execute its required missions?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Department of the Air Force is ready
    to deter, defend, and fight today. However, our advantage is shrinking,
    and overmatch is a concern of mine. If confirmed, I see my role as
    assisting the Secretary in enhancing that overmatch for our Air and
    Space Forces.
        Question. In your view, what are the priority missions for which
    current and future Air Force forces should be trained and ready in the
    context of day-to-day activities, as well as for contingencies?
        Answer. The Secretary of Defense has been very clear in focusing on
    re-establishing deterrence, a warrior ethos, and rebuilding our
    military. Due to this, Air and Space Force should be trained and ready
    to execute five core missions: air & space superiority, global
    precision attack, rapid global mobility, global intelligence,
    surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), and command and control.
    Together, these functions provide a range of pre-emptive and reactive
    options to the National Command Authority and allow the Department to
    integrate with the joint force in peacetime, crisis, strategic
    deterrence, and project power for high-end conflict. As we maintain
    readiness, individual units may not train to all five core functions,
    but as a department we stand ready to provide Air Superiority, Global
    Precision Attack, Rapid Global Mobility, Global ISR, and Command and
    Control, homeland, anywhere in the world, in support of U.S. national
    interests.
        Question. Does the Air Force have the requisite analytic
    capabilities and tools to support you, if confirmed as the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force, in measuring its readiness to execute the
    broad range of potential Air Force missions envisioned by 2022 NDS and
    associated operational plans--from low-intensity, gray-zone conflicts
    to protracted high intensity fights? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. The Air Force analytic and wargaming tools are essential to
    understanding our readiness and modernization portfolios and to make
    the right decisions that save taxpayers money and ensure the U.S.
    unparalleled advantage. While good, additional capability and capacity
    is required to modernize our wargaming, link models, and improve our
    ability for rapid, timely analysis. We require sophisticated capability
    tradeoff tools that enable a deep understanding of risk-to-mission,
    risk-to-force, and the true costs associated with different force
    structure choices at the speed a scale required to for thorough, data-
    driven judgments that outpace our adversaries. To best support the
    joint force, our Air Force requires advanced wargaming tools and
    dedicated spaces, rapid modeling and simulation capabilities, improved
    and cost-efficient data architecture, and interconnected tradeoff
    tools.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize maintaining
    readiness in the near term, with modernizing the Air Force to ensure
    future readiness?
        Answer. In the near term, the Air Force must focus on developing
    readiness for a peer threat while making smart risk decisions to
    prevent overconsuming current force readiness. To ensure future
    readiness, I believe the Air Force should focus efforts toward finding
    balance between readiness and modernization. This is a tough challenge
    because modernization cannot happen only in time of need and should not
    be conducted across the force simultaneously. If confirmed, I will work
    with Air Force leadership to phase in modernization that minimizes
    impact upon total force readiness and take only calculated and
    appropriate risk to either.
                                     budget
        Question. If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the
    adequacy of funding for the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. If confirmed as Under Secretary, I will collaborate with
    military leaders to ensure Air and Space Force budgets prioritize
    homeland defense and deterring China and other adversaries. The DAF
    must align with Defense strategy, maintain readiness, and modernize to
    meet evolving threats. DAF must maintain air and space superiority to
    project power and support the Joint Force. I look forward to ensuring
    the resources given by Congress are used efficiently to maximize the
    DAF's effectiveness.
                                  acquisition
        Question. Civilian oversight of the acquisition system has been a
    cornerstone of the post-World War Two acquisition system.
        What are your personal views on the principle of civilian control
    of the defense acquisition system?
        Answer. Delivering the capabilities our warfighters need on time
    and within resources requires a collaborative effort between military,
    civilian, and industry stakeholders. Strong and decisive civilian
    leadership is necessary to ensure these efforts are executed with
    discipline and rigor. If confirmed, I will work with the Department of
    the Air Force's Senior Acquisition Executives to ensure cost, schedule,
    and performance is maintained within our acquisition system.
        Question. As Under Secretary of the Air Force, what would be your
    role in the Air Force acquisition process--including in the processes
    of defining requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will fulfill my role in the acquisition
    process as assigned to me by the Secretary of the Air Force and as
    prescribed by 10 U.S.C. Sec.  9015. This will include executing all
    aspects of acquisition and budgeting as requested by the Secretary and
    in accordance with department policy. Additionally, I will work the
    Secretary of the Air Force, the Service Chiefs for the Air Force and
    the Space Force, and their staffs, to ensure requirements, acquisition,
    and budgets align.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    improve each of the three aspects of the Air Force acquisition
    process--requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will team with the Assistant Secretaries
    for Financial Management; Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; and
    Space Acquisition and Integration to review current processes and
    identify where there is room for improvement. Next, I will work with
    them to develop potential efforts for consideration by the Secretary
    and support the decision throughout implementation. We must ensure we
    maximize our budget resources to deliver effective programs that meet
    requirements.
        Question. What specific measures would you recommend to ensure
    producibility and speed to field are considered for program
    requirements in the Air Force acquisition system?
        Answer. Efficient production is a key factor in delivering
    warfighter capabilities in an affordable manner within a relevant
    timeframe. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary, Department of
    the Air Force leaders, and industry to ensure requirements prioritize
    producibility, agility, and speed in the Air Force acquisition system.
        Question. What metrics are used to measure the success of rapid
    acquisition projects? How is accountability ensured to maintain quality
    and performance standards while accelerating the acquisition timeline?
        Answer. Success in rapid acquisition projects hinges on balancing
    speed with effectiveness. Several key metrics are used to measure this
    success including cost, schedule, and performance. If confirmed, I will
    work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
    and Sustainment as well as Service Acquisition Executives to ensure
    rapid acquisition projects are executed with discipline and rigor.
        Question. How will you seek to balance the need to rapidly acquire
    and field innovative systems while ensuring acquisition programs stay
    on budget and schedule?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Secretary,
    Department of the Air Force Leaders, Congress, and other Department
    stakeholders to streamline the requirements and acquisition process. I
    will ensure our acquisition programs provide meaningful and effective
    capabilities for the Joint force while leveraging all acquisition
    authorities and flexibilities to deliver at speed and scale. If
    confirmed, I will also ensure we have the necessary policies in place
    to strengthen the health of the defense industrial base.
        Question. What are your views on the appropriate roles of OSD
    developmental and operational testing organizations with respect to
    testing of Air Force systems?
        Answer. Collaboration with our teammates in OSD development and
    test organizations is crucial for ensuring effective use of defense
    funding for next-generation warfighting capabilities. As the Air Force
    prioritizes rapid capability development, OSD guidance may require
    streamlining to expedite testing and evaluation without compromising
    thorough oversight.
        Question. What do you see as the role of the developmental and
    operational test and evaluation communities with respect to rapid
    acquisition, spiral acquisition, and other streamlined acquisition
    processes?
        Answer. I believe the developmental and operational test and
    evaluation communities are critical stakeholders within acquisition
    processes and play a key role in ensuring the timely deployment of
    systems that deliver operational advantages to our warfighters while
    meeting their requirements. For any program, regardless of its
    structure, the sequencing and content of testing should be customized
    to the specific program, considering factors such as technical and
    operational risks, the urgency of operational needs, and the efficiency
    of the testing process.
        Question. In which areas, if any, do you feel the Air Force should
    be developing new test and evaluation capabilities?
        Answer. In my opinion, faster capability delivery requires
    streamlined developmental and operational testing using real-time data
    analytics and AI-driven assessments for rapid feedback and assured
    mission effectiveness.
        Question. To what extent should the Air Force exploit non-
    developmental or commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Air Force
    requirements? Would this put capabilities into the hands of airmen and
    guardians more quickly, in your view?
        Answer. I believe the Department of the Air Force should exploit
    non-developmental items (NDI) and commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
    solutions where feasible, balancing the benefits of rapid acquisition
    and cost savings against potential drawbacks. Prioritizing readily
    available solutions can indeed put capabilities into the hands of
    airmen and guardians more quickly.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you accelerate the development of
    these new capabilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for simplifying and
    accelerating the acquisition process for NDI/COTS solutions. This
    includes reducing bureaucratic hurdles, streamlining documentation
    requirements, and empowering program managers to make rapid decisions.
    Exploring and expanding the use of Other Transaction Authorities (OTAs)
    and similar flexible acquisition mechanisms would be a priority.
                                  requirements
        Question. The Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act
    required the Joint Staff to take a clean-sheet approach to the
    requirements process, and the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense
    Authorization Act required the Secretary of Defense to establish an
    advisory panel on reforming the requirements process.
        What recommendations would you make to the requirements process to
    make it more adaptive to changes in threats and technologies?
        Answer. In my opinion, top-level requirements could be written in
    broad mission areas to allow the acquisition community to decompose
    them in ways that allow for rapid technological insertion, increased
    adaptation of commercial capabilities, and the flexibility to trade
    performance for speed in certain circumstances. I believe a robust
    discussion of the reforms proposed in the FoRGED Act and the report
    directed under Section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act
    for Fiscal Year 2024 will allow the Military Services to work with
    Congress on potential process reforms.
        Question. What role do you see for the Joint Staff versus the
    military services in the requirements process?
        Answer. The Joint Staff (JS) acts as the integrator for service
    needs, ensuring the services are working together to provide effective
    mission solutions as a joint team. Furthermore, the JS must provide
    oversight, ensuring the voice of the joint warfighter is front and
    center in the requirements process. In addition, the JS ensures the
    voices of all Services and Combatant Commands are taken into
    consideration and manages the process of joint requirements
    development. The Space Force has unique authorities in the requirements
    process due to the designation of the Chief of Space Operations (CSO)
    as Force Design Architect for the Armed Forces, and as the Joint Space
    Integrator, which provide him broad latitude to capture and satisfy
    joint warfighting gaps that can be filled with space capabilities along
    with developing Service specific requirements.
                                     audit
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions will you take or
    direct to enable the Air Force to achieve a clean financial audit in
    the most expedited fashion?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Air Force has made substantial audit
    progress, with roughly 70 percent or so of its general fund balance
    sheet audit-ready. If confirmed, I will prioritize completing an audit
    quickly, leveraging industry tools and software to accelerate the
    process.
        Question. What are the benefits to Air Force missions and
    effectiveness of achieving and maintaining a clean audit?
        Answer. Annual audits drive positive change, bolstering mission
    readiness while streamlining operations. Pursuing a clean audit opinion
    enhances Air Force accountability for assets (aircraft, munitions,
    satellites, engines, property), directly impacting mission
    effectiveness.
        Question. How will you hold Department of the Air Force leaders and
    organizations responsible and accountable for making the necessary
    investments and changes to correct findings and material weaknesses
    identified in the audit process?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary to establish
    Air Force accountability through new governance, strict remediation
    timelines for senior leaders, and targeted investments to achieve a
    clean audit by the 2028 congressional mandate.
        Question. Based on your experience, how do you see improved data
    from Air Force financial management IT systems that support audit help
    Air Force decisionmaking and readiness?
        Answer. In my opinion, auditable financial IT systems improve
    readiness reporting (asset status), budget accuracy (focusing on real
    needs), and vendor negotiations (cost-effective mission support).
        Question. As the Air Force continues down the path to a clean
    audit, there are still lessons that can be gleaned beyond the end goal
    of a clean audit opinion.
        Based on your experience, how do you anticipate operationalizing
    any intermediate lessons from audit into the Air Force' overall
    management reform objectives?
        Answer. My experience here is limited, but I believe a clean audit
    opinion demonstrates a level of organizational competence and control
    directly supporting readiness efforts through efficient business
    operations. This approach enables the DAF to quickly adapt to change
    while maintaining a consistent readiness posture.
                               air force programs
        Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the
    research, development, and acquisition programs supporting Air Force
    modernization?
        Answer. The Air Force needs a mission-driven research and
    development (R&D) approach (science and technology, prototyping,
    experimentation). If confirmed, I will collaborate with the Secretary
    and Acquisition Executives on a risk/mission-balanced portfolio
    addressing near/long-term needs aligned with interim National Defense
    Strategy guidance.
        Question. Where do you believe are the greatest gaps that remain
    between required and current capability in both the Air and Space
    Forces?
        Answer. Any USSF capability gap would be concerning. We must
    develop both offensive and defensive space control for any potential
    conflict and for day-to-day operational freedom. Enhanced resilience,
    via proliferated constellations, commercial capabilities, and
    protection against kinetic and non-kinetic threats, is absolutely
    crucial.
        Question. The Air Force is on record as stating a need to purchase
    a minimum of 72 fighter aircraft per year to maintain requisite force
    structure.
        In your opinion, what is the optimum mix of 4th and 5th generation
    aircraft required to meet the threat outlined in the NDS?
        Answer. In my opinion, the Air Force requires sufficient 4th and
    5th generation aircraft located and operated in areas suited to their
    capabilities. Fourth generation aircraft have many roles to play, and
    where those roles exist, they should be performed by 4th generation--
    not 5th generation--aircraft in order to preserve 5th generation
    aircraft for missions only they can perform. From a capabilities
    perspective, our 4th Generation aircraft still have an active role to
    play in all but the densest and most advanced threat environments
    around the world. Where the threat increases, specifically as we move
    closer to Chinese mainland, the integration of 5th generation
    capabilities becomes more important. But the question of fighter fleet
    composition isn't just about capability, it's also about managing the
    overall health of an aging aircraft fleet. We need to continually
    replace 4th generation fighters with 5th generation fighters over time,
    not just to address a growing, proliferating adversary threat, but also
    to efficiently and effectively manage readiness and sustainment over
    the coming decades.
        Question. Given the importance of extending the range of U.S.
    aircraft, what do you believe to be the overall tanker requirement for
    the Air Force? At what rate and on what schedule must the Air Force
    procure the new KC-46 to meet that requirement?
        Answer. Global Air Force deployments rely on aerial refueling.
    Tankers extend the reach of fighters, bombers, reconnaissance, and
    cargo aircraft. A robust, adaptable tanker force is crucial for future
    conflicts. Tankers must refuel receivers when and wherever they need
    gas, ensuring Joint Force deterrence. Studies show benefits from
    tankers with enhanced battlespace awareness, survivability systems. KC-
    46A procurement, KC-135 modernization continue. Given tanker
    criticality, the Air Force needs all current and modernized assets,
    ensuring no capability gaps.
        Question. Large-scale exercises such as Red Flag have illustrated
    that 5th generation fighters such as the F-22 and F-35 need to fly
    against multiple adversary aircraft to conduct much of their required
    training. The Air Force has taken a number of steps to address
    shortages in adversary air, including using contract air and requiring
    units in training to supply their own adversary air.
        What are your views as to the appropriate balance of contract and
    organic adversary air capability?
        Answer. The Air Force prioritizes adversary air for combat
    training. Ideally, organic generation (unit sorties/aggressor force)
    would suffice. From what I understand, aircraft availability and
    instructor pilot manning necessitate contracted adversary air.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    properly addresses the challenges associated with the availability of
    adversary air to ensure that its 5th generation fighters are properly
    trained and ready for combat?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider pursuing a professional 5th-
    generation aggressor force while also funding contract adversary air to
    support pilot production, absorption, and readiness, aligned with
    budget priorities.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    properly addresses the challenges associated with the availability of
    adversary air to ensure that its 5th generation fighters are properly
    trained and ready for combat?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would consider pursuing a professional 5th
    generation aggressor force while funding contract adversary air to
    support Air Force pilot production, absorption, and readiness
    commensurate with budget priorities.
        Question. What is your assessment of the readiness of the Air Force
    heavy bomber fleet? As to each of the airframes listed below, what
    improvements would you direct, if confirmed, to increase the mission
    readiness of each airframe (B-1, B-2, B52)?
        Answer. Currently, I am not aware of the challenges facing the
    heavy bomber air frames and am unable to assess the appropriate
    improvements that would enhance the readiness of the fleet. If
    confirmed, I look forward to supporting the readiness of our bomber
    fleet by working with the Secretary, Chief of Staff, and other the Air
    Force leadership.
                                   munitions
        Question. Air Force munitions inventories--particularly for
    precision guided munitions and air-to-air missiles--have declined
    significantly due to high operational usage, insufficient procurement,
    poor program execution, and a requirements system that does not
    adequately account for the ongoing need to transfer munitions to our
    allies. Due to draw down of certain weapons systems to support Ukraine,
    the Department of Defense has begun to increase production and bolster
    the industrial base.
        If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the Air Force has
    sufficient inventories of munitions to meet the needs of combatant
    commanders?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review procurement plans, ensuring
    maximum production of critical weapons and looking to expand capacity
    as needed and where possible. I would also explore affordable mass
    weapons and expanded munitions production overall.
        Question. What changes in budgeting and acquisition processes would
    you recommend to facilitate faster Air Force munitions replenishment
    rates?
        Answer. Long lead times hinder munitions replenishment. If
    confirmed, I will explore solutions, including advance/multi-year
    procurement and industrial base expansion.
        Question. What is your view on the implications of DOD's self-
    imposed restrictions on area attack and denial munitions, which are
    intended to be consistent with the terms of the Ottawa Convention, to
    which the United States is not a party?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the US hasn't signed or ratified the
    Ottawa Treaty. If confirmed, I will ensure Air Force compliance with
    DOD directives, including munitions limitations.
        Question. Based on your experience, how should the Air Force be
    factoring in the needs of foreign partners and allies into overall
    munitions forecasting in order to improve the long-term production
    stability of the industrial base?
        Answer. The Air Force will collaborate with Allies and partners to
    project and formally submit long-term munitions needs. This demand
    signal enables US industrial base expansion, engaging lower-tier
    suppliers. Multi-year procurements provide industry stability for
    infrastructure, workforce, and supply chain investments, supporting
    defense industrial base revitalization.
        Question. The Fiscal Year 2024 NDAA required the Department of
    Defense to establish a pilot program to incorporate CL-20 into existing
    munitions.
        What is your understanding of the efforts by the Air Force to
    execute any activities under this pilot in order to improve the
    explosive yield or operational envelope of any of its munitions?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review Air Force efforts to understand
    the utility of CL-20 to improve the performance of existing munitions
    and for weapons currently in development.
        Question. Regardless of whether the Air Force is doing anything
    under this pilot program, how is the Air Force considering
    incorporation of new energetic materials, like CL-20, or new
    manufacturing processes for energetics, like biomanufacturing, into
    existing munitions to increase explosive effects or operational
    envelope of its weapons?
        Answer. I am aware of research on improved warheads and propellants
    for increased effectiveness and range solely based on publicly
    available information. If confirmed, I will ensure Air Force
    collaboration with industry to identify, develop, and implement these
    advancements.
                                     space
        Question. The United States is increasingly dependent on space,
    both economically and militarily--from the Global Positioning System on
    which many industries and military capabilities rely, to the missile
    warning systems that underpin U.S. nuclear deterrence. Our strategic
    competitors--China and Russia--are engaged in a concerted effort to
    leap ahead of U.S. technology and limit U.S. freedom of action in the
    space warfighting domain.
        In your view, does the 2022 NDS accurately assess the strategic
    environment as it pertains to the domain of space?
        Answer. The 2022 NDS recognized space as key to joint warfighting
    and highlights growing Chinese space capabilities. Secretary Hegseth
    emphasized space's importance, vowing investment in offensive and
    defensive capabilities. If confirmed, I will provide inputs in support
    of prioritizing a secure space environment for the US, our Allies, and
    partners, reflecting its growing importance.
        Question. In your view, what will ``great power competition'' look
    like in space and to what extent do you view China's and Russia's
    activities related to the space domain as a threat or challenge to U.S.
    national security interests?
        Answer. I believe China and Russia will continue to use coercion to
    undermine US partnerships. This is particularly true in the space
    domain, which is crucial to US security and prosperity. Achieving space
    superiority is vital for the Air Force and the Joint Force overall. If
    confirmed, I will work to ensure a robust US force structure with
    offensive and defensive space capabilities to achieve national security
    objectives.
        Question. Are there other nation-states or other actors operating
    in space that you perceive as a risk to the United States or as cause
    for concern? If so, why?
        Answer. Space is becoming more accessible for a greater number of
    actors. North Korea and Iran, though not rivaling great powers, exploit
    space and possess counterspace technology (e.g., jamming). Any actor
    can leverage space tech (navigation, communications, imagery) via
    smartphones, potentially challenging US interests. China's space
    expansion, particularly in developing nations, threatens US space
    influence, in my opinion.
        Question. What specific actions would you take, if confirmed, to
    enhance existing Air Force acquisition policies and process to move
    space operations projects to orbit faster and cheaper?
        Answer. The USSF must leverage private and commercial space
    industry innovation and take advantage of agile acquisition approaches.
    Driving speed into our acquisitions allows the Space Force to deliver
    new capabilities faster to outpace U.S. adversaries and maintain the
    technological advantage received from space. If confirmed, I will work
    with the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
    Sustainment, the other Departments, and with congressional stakeholders
    to implement policy and statutory reforms and integrate commercial
    space solutions needed to support moving space capabilities to orbit
    faster and cheaper.
        Question. The Space force is now acquiring space systems for
    protect and defend missions no different than any other weapon system
    of the Air Force.
        Do you believe the Space Force is adequately structured and capable
    to acquire, test and evaluate these weapons systems to deliver the
    required effects to the combatant commands such as Space Command?
        Answer. The Space Force is rapidly developing its acquisition
    processes for space-based weapon systems, but the unique features of
    the space domain require tailored testing and evaluation approaches.
    Increased resources and infrastructure for space-specific testing,
    including innovative methodologies and expanded capabilities, are
    crucial for robust assessments. Continuous adaptation and refinement of
    these processes will be essential for the Space Force to effectively
    deliver capabilities to Combatant Commands. This iterative approach
    will ensure the Space Force can meet the evolving demands of space-
    based defense.
        Question. What recommendations would you make to this acquisition
    and testing process to improve its effectiveness in supporting the
    combatant commands?
        Answer. The rapid pace of emerging technologies from adversaries
    requires an increasingly agile acquisition and testing process to
    integrate and operate capabilities that support the requirements needed
    by combatant commanders to meet warfighting timelines. If confirmed, I
    would review the current processes for acquisition and test and
    evaluation, work to reduce bureaucratic obstacles, and promote
    collaboration and integration with commercial capabilities to improve
    the Department's support to combatant commands and ensure they have the
    capabilities needed in the Joint fight.
        Question. What is your vision for the ideal relationship between
    the Space Force and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)? How will
    you minimize duplication of effort between the organizations?
        Answer. If confirmed, my vision is to ensure the Space Force works
    across the national security space community, including the NRO, to
    efficiently acquire and deploy the capabilities the guardians need to
    maintain the U.S.'s advantage in space. To minimize duplicative efforts
    with the NRO, I would prioritize a comprehensive review of current
    integration efforts to determine how the Department of the Air Force
    could better collaborate with its mission partners to successfully
    achieve this vision.
                          cyber and electronic warfare
        Question. Section 1657 of the fiscal year 2020 NDAA directed the
    appointment of an independent Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA) for each
    Military Department, to act as the principal advisor to the Secretary
    concerned on all cyber matters affecting that Department.
        What do you see as the role of this position in the Air Force?
        Answer. As mentioned, the role of the PCA is codified in law. If
    confirmed, I will advocate for the PCA to continue providing trusted
    advice on all cyber matters impacting the DAF.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to utilize the Air Force
    PCA as part of your leadership structure?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will recommend to the Secretary that we
    maintain the PCA's role as an independent cyber advisor within the
    DAF's leadership structure.
        Question. What are Air Force's top three cyber challenges, and how
    will you use the PCA to address them?
        Answer. In the current resource constrained environment, the DAF
    must field emerging technologies and novel solutions that enable
    warfighting and the warfighter. There are numerous challenges resident
    in the cyberspace domain, however top challenges include keeping pace
    with malicious cyber actors to ensure warfighting systems have
    integrity and are available to support warfighting requirements; the
    ability of the AF and USSF to provide fully trained and equipped forces
    for presentation to the Joint Force; and, the DAF's ability to address
    the resources required to secure, protect and defend Air and Space
    capabilities. The PCA's statutory role as an independent advisor is
    crucial to providing unbiased advice and feedback on recommendations
    from the Services on proposed solutions to the challenges across the
    cyberspace domain.
        Question. In September 2023, DOD released its 2023 Cyber Strategy.
    The strategy charges DOD to persistently engage malicious cyber actors
    and other malign threats to U.S. interests in cyberspace.
        In your view, how well postured is the Air Force to meet the goals
    outlined in the 2023 Cyber Strategy? What actions would you take, if
    confirmed, to mitigate any gap between Air Force capacity and
    capability and Cyber Strategy goals?
        Answer. The DAF is focused on implementing the current DOD Cyber
    Strategy. If confirmed, I will advocate for continuous reassessment of
    current and future investment strategies, resources, and policies
    necessary to mitigate any gaps that exist in our capability and
    capacity to maintain warfighting readiness and lethality across the
    cyberspace domain.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve
    military and civilian cybersecurity career paths?
        Answer. Protecting Americans requires prioritizing cybersecurity.
    Our military and civilian workforce is key. If confirmed, I will
    champion cyber workforce modernization: streamlining careers, deepening
    expertise (via industry/academia collaboration), aligning roles with
    classifications, improving talent management, enabling outside
    transitions to public service, and securing competitive incentives and
    development programs to attract and retain top talent.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do to enhance Air Force
    information dominance capabilities?
        Answer. Air and Space Force missions require information dominance.
    JADC2 and GIISR development must consider system interconnectedness and
    actionable information for timely decisions. Future operations need
    near real-time, accurate tactical information globally, without
    disruptive classification or sharing barriers. If confirmed, I will
    leverage partnerships to field information systems optimizing air and
    space power, enabling joint and combined forces to achieve national
    security objectives.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what measures would you take
    or direct to improve the cybersecurity culture across the Air Force
    workforce--military, civilian, and contractor? How would you empower
    and hold key leaders accountable for improvements in DOD cybersecurity?
        Answer. Cybersecurity is everyone's responsibility. If confirmed, I
    will empower the workforce to identify and mitigate risks, fostering
    shared responsibility for system and information security. We will
    embed cybersecurity in acquisitions, prioritize critical vulnerability
    investments, and enforce accountability for negligence. I will champion
    cybersecurity in exercises and inspections, informing investments. This
    fosters cybersecurity ownership, keeping the Air Force ahead of
    threats.
        Question. What is your vision for the future of Air Force
    electronic warfare (EW) capabilities?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Department's new EMS superiority
    policy addresses contested spectrum, restructuring/modernizing EW, and
    promoting EMS/EW awareness (training/doctrine). This aligns with the
    interim National Defense Strategy guidance. EW is crucial; Air and
    Space Force investment in it is essential. Joint and combined
    operations require EMS-focused, software-defined, rapidly updatable
    capabilities. If confirmed, I will prioritize EW, supporting innovation
    and new doctrine in this area.
        Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy and efficacy of
    the EW training that Air Force personnel received in an Air Force
    environment in specific airframes? In a joint environment with other
    Military Services?
        Answer. Enhanced Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (EMSO)
    training (operational/tactical/personnel) is likely needed. A finite
    spectrum and increasing demand (military/civilian/commercial) creates
    congestion. Training is constrained by physics, technology, and
    domestic/international law/policy. Collaboration with stakeholders is
    needed to find realistic joint training solutions minimizing impact on
    other spectrum users.
        Question. The Air Force is now re-invigorating the role of EW in
    the combat arms. It has stood up the 350th electronic warfare wing to
    ensure EW and Spectrum operations can perform their mission against a
    near peer adversary at speed and relevance. It has begun to acquire the
    EA-37B electronic warfare platform, which has the capability to perform
    EW and spectrum operations across multiple domains. Lacking however is
    the development of a dedicated career field devoted to EW and spectrum
    operations.
        If confirmed, will you commit to review and report back to this
    committee on the role of EW and spectrum operations in the Air Force to
    ensure it is holistically integrated across multiple domains, whether
    the 350th EW wing can adequately support the EW platforms that the Air
    Force maintains and whether there should be a dedicated career field to
    this mission set?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Department's electronic
    warfare/spectrum operations posture, focusing on cross-domain
    integration, the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing's support capacity, and
    the feasibility and benefits of a dedicated career field.
                                unmanned systems
        Question. What is your opinion on the manned and unmanned teaming
    envisioned by the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program?
        Answer. In my opinion, to dominate in contested and highly
    contested environments, the Air Force must innovate with regard to
    risk-tolerant and runway-flexible capabilities that strengthen combat
    power generation, credible mass, and forward posture. Collaborative
    Combat Aircraft, teaming with crewed platforms like the F-22, F-35, and
    F-47, represent an innovative capability that can be purchased at lower
    costs than a comparable crewed platform, will help reduce our
    dependence on traditional Main Operating Bases, and will increase the
    lethality and survivability of our more exquisite, crewed platforms
    during conflict.
        Question. Do you see utility in encouraging the Military Services
    to conduct more joint development in the area of aircraft and unmanned
    systems?
        Answer. There is significant utility in ensuring compatibility and
    adaptability of unmanned systems across the Joint Force. Similar
    systems can be used for different service missions; and specific
    service systems can be used to address gaps in Joint Concepts. Joint
    development increases alignment, opens options for missions, and
    targets and helps to give direction and vector to spur growth in the
    industrial base. While there is benefit in compatibility and
    adaptability, we must ensure joint development does not increase unit
    cost or reduce capability.
                        air force military end strength
        Question. In your view, is the Air Force's current end strength
    sufficient to meet national defense objectives? If not, what end
    strength do you believe is necessary to do so?
        Answer. Combatant commanders are calling for more air and space
    power, not less. Based on publicly available information, I am
    concerned as to whether the Air Force's current end strength is
    sufficient to meet national defense objectives, especially when
    contemplating the prospect of waging conflict in multiple theaters or
    regions simultaneously. However, I do not, at present, know what that
    proper end strength is. If confirmed, I will make it a priority to
    investigate this matter and communicate my findings and recommendations
    with this committee.
        Question. How will the continued stand up of the Space Force, and
    the related transfer of Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard
    personnel, impact Air Force and Space Force end strength requirements
    over the next 5 years, in your view?
        Answer. The capabilities of Air Force Reserve and Air National
    Guard personnel performing space missions is essential. I will ensure
    DAF submits end strength and resource requests to Congress commensurate
    with the transfer of space missions and personnel to the Space Force,
    including end strength adjustments required by Section 514 of the
    Fiscal Year 2025 NDAA as covered space functions transfer from the Air
    National Guard to the Space Force.
        Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
    the Air Force need, in your view? Is the Air Force's current end
    strength sufficient to meet national defense objectives? If not, what
    end strength do you believe is necessary?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Chief of Staff of the
    Air Force, the Chief of Space Operations, the Director, Air National
    Guard, and the Chief of Air Force Reserve to review Air Force and Space
    Force end strength requirements to ensure an adequate balance between
    current operational requirements and any future force requirements. I
    will commit to ensuring the right end strength is achieved to properly
    sustain a force structure that meets all mission demands and continuing
    to work on modernizing our capabilities and our force.
        Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
    the Air Force need, in your view?
        Answer. I am not aware of any additional authorities needed at this
    time. If confirmed, I will review force shaping tools, ensuring proper
    DAF force strength management. I will work with Congress to maintain
    DAF agility regarding needed force size and skills.
                       air force recruiting and retention
        Question. The 2024 National Defense Strategy Commission stated that
    ``The DOD workforce and the all-volunteer force provide an unmatched
    advantage. However, recruiting failures have shrunk the force and raise
    serious questions about the all-volunteer force in peacetime, let alone
    in major combat.'' In addition, DOD studies indicate that only about 23
    percent of today's youth population is eligible for military service,
    and only a fraction of those who meet military accession standards are
    interested in serving.
        If confirmed, how would you ensure the Department of the Air Force
    maintains sufficiently high recruitment and retention standards?
        Answer. The Department constantly evaluates recruitment and
    retention programs, optimizing for talent competition. Recruiting and
    retention rates are high. If confirmed, I will review these, ensuring
    we attract and retain high-quality talent needed for national defense.
        Question. If required to choose between maintaining high
    recruitment and retention standards and achieving authorized end
    strength levels, which would be more important, in your view?
        Answer. Maintaining readiness while building the future force is
    crucial. Data-informed recruiting and retention is key. If confirmed, I
    will assess standards and policies, ensuring they support readiness and
    warfighting needs.
        Question. What impact do current medical and other qualifications
    for enlistment in the Air Force have on the number of individuals
    eligible for military service? If confirmed, what changes to such
    qualifications, if any, would you recommend to increase the number of
    individuals eligible for service without degrading the quality of
    recruits?
        Answer. I do not have access to information that would give me a
    reason to doubt current standards. In my view, we must balance
    standards with medical science/modernization and force readiness. If
    confirmed, I will review qualifications and will prioritize this
    balance, working with DOD to maximize effectiveness and ensure
    readiness.
        Question. Rather than relying solely on ever-higher compensation
    for a shrinking pool of volunteers, what creative steps would you take,
    if confirmed, to expand the pool of eligible recruits and improve Air
    Force recruiting?
        Answer. To my knowledge, Air and Space Force recruiting is on track
    for fiscal year 2025, with record highs. If confirmed, I will evaluate
    recruiting personnel, marketing, policies, and programs to ensure we
    attract the talent needed for warfighter readiness.
        Question. What do you consider to be key to the Department of the
    Air Force's future success in retaining the best qualified personnel
    for continued service in positions of greater responsibility and
    leadership in the Air Force and Space Force?
        Answer. Developing and retaining personnel requires continuous
    training, education, and experience, fostering DAF leadership. If
    confirmed, I will collaborate with development and management experts
    and career field managers to align officer/enlisted/civilian
    development with Air and Space Force needs, ensuring robust quality of
    life and quality of service programs supporting our airmen and
    guardians and their families.
        Question. What steps, if any, should be taken to ensure that
    current operational requirements and tempo do not adversely impact the
    overall recruiting, retention, readiness, and morale of airmen and
    guardians?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate operational requirements,
    recruiting, retention, and readiness to prioritize strategic force
    management, quality-of-life, quality-of-service, warrior ethos, and
    technology/innovation. I will tirelessly advocate for our airmen and
    guardians, ensuring they have the necessary resources, training, and
    support.
        Question. In your view, do current recruiting standards--
    particularly DOD-wide criteria for tier-one recruits--accurately
    predict recruit attrition and/or future success in the Air Force?
        Answer. To my understanding, DOD's tier-one recruiting standards
    (education/aptitude/fitness) are valuable. Robust standards aid initial
    unit integration, but predicting attrition and success is difficult
    given evolving warfare and diverse career paths. If confirmed, I will
    ensure DAF prioritizes meritocracy and refines recruitment metrics.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the Air Force and
    Space Force can continue to bring in new talent, while managing high
    retention?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with our services to continuously
    evaluate our recruiting force, our marketing strategies, and our
    recruiting policies and programs to recruit new talent. We will
    continuously evaluate our training, education, and experiential
    development to retain the right leaders, and continuously look at how
    we are providing quality of life and quality of service to keep
    retention high.
        Question. How would an individual's job performance factor into
    your decisions to grant enlistment extensions or officer continuation?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would evaluate how job performance is
    currently considered in Air Force and Space Force retention decisions,
    recognizing that force structure requirements are also important
    considerations in granting enlistment extensions and officer
    continuation to ensure the services maintain necessary manning across
    career fields.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Department of
    the Air Force maintains sufficiently high recruitment and retention
    standards?
        Answer. I understand the Department continuously evaluates
    recruitment and retention programs to optimize policies and processes
    necessary to thrive in the fierce competition for talent. I understand
    the Department is seeing historically high recruiting and retention
    rates. If confirmed, I will review these standards to ensure we recruit
    and retain quality, highly skilled talent needed to fight and defend
    the Nation we serve.
        Question. In your view, what impact do current medical and other
    qualifications for enlistment in the Department of the Air Force have
    on restricting the number of individuals eligible for military service?
        Answer. I currently have no reason or data to doubt the current
    standards and criteria. In my view, we must balance our standards to
    keep pace with medical science and modernization while meeting the need
    for a ready and capable force. To that end, if confirmed, I will keep
    the balance of those standards in the forefront and work with DOD to
    maximize our effectiveness and ensure force readiness.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes to such qualifications, if
    any, would you recommend to increase the number of individuals eligible
    for service in the Air Force or Space Force without degrading the
    quality of recruits?
        Answer. Again, I currently have no reason or data to doubt the
    current standards and criteria. In my opinion, we must balance our
    standards to keep pace with medical science and modernization while
    meeting the need for a ready and capable force. If confirmed, I will
    keep the balance of those standards in the forefront and work with DOD
    to maximize our effectiveness and ensure force readiness.
        Question. What factors do you consider to be key to the Department
    of the Air Force's future success in retaining the best qualified
    personnel for continued service in positions of greater responsibility
    and leadership?
        Answer. Developing and retaining personnel requires continuous
    training, education, and experience that fosters DAF leaders. If
    confirmed, I will collaborate with development and career field
    managers to align officer, enlisted, and civilian development with Air
    and Space Force needs, ensuring robust quality of life and quality of
    service programs.
                                pilot retention
        Question. The Air Force has consistently reported a shortage of
    thousands of pilots including a shortage of at least 950 fighter
    pilots.
        What are the Air Force's current efforts to address this critical
    problem? How would you assess the effectiveness of these efforts to
    date?
        Answer. I believe airline hiring growth challenges Air Force pilot
    retention. This represents a risk to critical experience in the force.
    Congress enabled historically high pilot retention bonuses. If
    confirmed, I will monitor bonus effectiveness and work with Air Force
    leaders and Congress to improve pilot production and retention.
        Question. What monetary and non-monetary incentives and initiatives
    implemented by the Air Force have yielded the most positive impacts on
    pilot retention?
        Answer. The Department prioritizes pilot retention (compensation,
    talent management, quality of life/service), using targeted bonuses,
    assignment stability and transparency, and a holistic approach. If
    confirmed, I will monitor these efforts, working with Air Force leaders
    to ensure effectiveness.
        Question. What additional authorities does the Air Force need from
    Congress to address this shortfall definitively?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review whether and/or what additional
    authorities are needed to address the pilot shortage.
        Question. How has the Air Force increased pilot production capacity
    commensurate with the demands of the NDS?
        Answer. To my understanding, the Department recognizes the critical
    importance of addressing the pilot shortage to meet the demands of the
    Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance with a highly trained and
    ready force. The Air Force has implemented numerous programs to
    increase pilot production capacity through a multi-pronged approach
    that encompasses recruitment, retention, modernization of training, and
    monetary incentives.
        Question. As the Air Force prepares for competition with a peer-
    adversary, what steps is it taking to increase quality standards within
    and screening rates for flight school, and the pipeline beyond?
        Answer. The Air Force's mission requires addressing the pilot
    shortage. If confirmed, I will consult experts within the Department
    and externally to enhance pilot pipelines, optimize training, and
    prioritize retention.
                          air force reserve components
        Question. In your view, what is the appropriate relationship
    between the Active Air Force and the Air Force Reserve and Air Force
    National Guard?
        Answer. Active/Guard/Reserve interoperability is crucial. Seamless
    integration enhances Total Force capability and readiness. If
    confirmed, I will evaluate component dynamics to leverage each
    component's unique strengths.
        Question. What is your vision for the roles and missions of the Air
    Force Reserve Components? If confirmed, what new objectives would you
    seek to achieve with respect to the Air Force Reserve Components'
    organization, force structure, and end strength?
        Answer. The Total Force, including the uniquely capable Air Reserve
    Component, needs roles/missions aligned with interim National Defense
    Strategic Guidance. The Guard/Reserve provide strategic depth/
    operational capacity across all missions/domains. If confirmed, I will
    ensure an integrated Total Force approach to organizing, training, and
    equipping airmen.
        Question. Are you concerned that continued reliance on Air Force
    Reserve Components to execute operational missions--both at home and
    around the globe--is adversely affecting the ability to meet their
    recruiting and retention missions? Why or why not?
        Answer. In my opinion, sustained operations tempo creates
    challenges. If confirmed, I will consult Guard/Reserve leadership,
    assessing impacts and identifying necessary support for long-term force
    health.
                               nuclear enterprise
        Question. The Air Force is responsible for maintaining and
    operating two legs of the nuclear triad, including its nuclear weapons
    and the majority of the 107 nuclear command, control and communications
    systems that link the President to the nuclear forces. There have been
    a number of troubling incidents since 2007, including the inadvertent
    transportation of six nuclear armed AGM-86 cruise missiles without
    authorization by a B-52 from Minot Air Force Base to Barksdale Air
    Forces Base, and the shipment of ICBM fuses to Taiwan. There have also
    been continued reports of low morale and incidents of cheating on exams
    at ICBM bases. These actions resulted in a loss of confidence and
    dismissal of the two senior leaders of the Air Force, both the
    Secretary and the Chief of Staff. They also resulted in number of
    reviews, including a DOD enterprise review in 2014 by Secretary Hagel.
    The reviews resulted in such actions as creation of Air Force Global
    Strike Command, and its elevation to a four-star command, and the
    establishment of a Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Deterrence and
    Nuclear Integration (A10).
        What are your overall views on responsibility of the Under
    Secretary of the Air Force as regards the nuclear enterprise?
        Answer. The Secretary (through the Under Secretary and Chief of
    Staff) ensures nuclear deterrence mission safety, security,
    reliability, effectiveness and credibility. If confirmed, this will be
    a top priority.
        Question. If confirmed, what actions will you take to oversee the
    continued implementation of these reforms of the nuclear-focused
    organizational and personnel systems?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would assess implementation and
    effectiveness of these reforms to determine their positive impact and I
    commit to sharing the results of that assessment with this Committee.
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to ensure these
    nuclear-related systems are adequately resourced?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize monitoring Air Force
    nuclear enterprise resourcing to ensure sufficient support for mission
    safety, security, reliability, effectiveness, and credibility.
        Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you will personally
    visit Air Force nuclear facilities and bases to gain an in-depth
    understanding of both the infrastructure, hardware, and especially how
    our airmen operate, maintain and secure them?
        Answer. Yes. Strategic nuclear deterrence is a top DAF priority. If
    confirmed, I will personally visit airmen executing this 24/7 mission,
    ensuring they have the necessary resources and facilities.
        Question. If confirmed, will you commit to preserving the unique
    role of Air Force Global Strike Command within the Air Force nuclear
    enterprise and ensuring its structure reflects the command's
    responsibility for two legs of the Nation's strategic nuclear triad and
    over 70 percent of the DOD's nuclear command, control, and
    communications capabilities?
        Answer. Consistent with the direction of the Secretary, the CSAF
    and I, if confirmed, will ensure any restructuring of AFGSC will
    improve the nuclear enterprise obligations to USSTRATCOM and not
    adversely impact it.
        Question. The 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) reaffirmed long-
    held American doctrine to maintain the Nation's nuclear triad of land-,
    sea-, and air-based capabilities.
        Do you agree that modernizing each leg of the nuclear triad and the
    Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons complex is a critical
    national security priority?
        Answer. Yes, modernizing the nuclear triad and the Department of
    Energy's nuclear weapons complex is not just a priority, but a
    necessity for maintaining America's defense superiority. A robust and
    modern nuclear deterrent is the cornerstone of our national security,
    and it is essential that we invest in its modernization to stay ahead
    of emerging threats and maintain our strategic edge. If confirmed, I
    will assess the status and provide the needed advocacy to continue to
    have a capable, and ready nuclear deterrent.
        Question. Do you believe the current program of record is
    sufficient to support the full modernization of the nuclear triad,
    including delivery systems, warheads, and infrastructure?
        Answer. As I understand it, the current plan modernizes the triad
    (delivery systems, warheads, infrastructure). If confirmed, I will
    review existing nuclear systems and modernization initiatives to best
    maintain a safe, secure, effective deterrent.
        Question. The Minuteman III ICBM is decades beyond its planned
    lifecycle and must be replaced by the Sentinel ICBM if the U.S. is to
    retain a triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems. However, the
    Sentinel program has encountered significant issues over the past year,
    culminating with a Nunn-McCurdy breach.
        Do you support the current program of record for the Sentinel ICBM,
    and if confirmed, will you advocate for fully funding the program?
        Answer. Sentinel, certified as essential, underwent restructuring.
    If confirmed, I will follow Nunn-McCurdy recommendations. ICBM
    modernization is absolutely foundational to deterrence. I will continue
    to seek schedule and cost improvements for the program. Success
    requires coordinated government, industry and community effort for this
    massive, once-in-a-generation modernization.
        Question. Do you support the current program of record for the
    Long-Range Stand Off weapon and if confirmed, will you advocate for
    fully funding the program?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the status of the Long-Range
    Stand-Off (LRSO) program, ensuring on-time delivery of this critical
    deterrence capability and adequate resourcing.
        Question. What are your views on expanding production of the B-21
    bomber?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the B-21 program and work with
    Air Force leaders and the Commander of USSTRATCOM to assess the total
    number required for the Joint Force.
        Question. What are your views on reconverting the full B-52 fleet
    back to be nuclear-capable once the New START Treaty expires?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the Air Force has assessed what it would
    take to achieve full B-52 nuclear reconversion. If confirmed, I will
    review this assessment and ensure the Air Force is postured and
    responsive to Presidential direction.
        Question. The Air Force owns and operates the majority of the 107
    nuclear command, control and communications systems. Major reforms have
    been put in place at U.S. Strategic Command to set future requirements,
    while the Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment oversees the
    acquisition of new capabilities to replace existing systems.
        What are your views on the adequacy of the current Air Force
    nuclear, command, control and communications systems?
        Answer. Maintaining safe, secure, reliable, effective, and credible
    nuclear deterrence, including NC3, aligns with the Secretary of
    Defense's priorities for the Department. If confirmed, I will assess
    DAF NC3 systems, evaluating their contribution to this deterrence.
        Question. Do you support the current organizational approach to the
    acquisition and management oversight of the modernization of nuclear
    command, control and communications?
        Answer. I have not yet been fully briefed on this approach. If
    confirmed, I will review Air Force NC3 modernization programs and their
    management structures.
        Question. The E-4B National Airborne Operations Center utilizes an
    aging 747-200 platform that must be replaced in the 2030's to ensure
    the capability and continuity of a number of essential missions
    including nuclear, command, control and communications.
        What are your views on the Survivable Airborne Operations Center
    program to replace this platform?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the SAOC program, ensuring it
    delivers the critical capability of a highly survivable command,
    control, and communications center.
        Question. Patrols in the missile fields are accomplished using
    Humvees which are ill-equipped for the long duration patrols, extreme
    cold and road conditions resulting in accidents and tragic fatalities
    of missile field Security Forces. The use of Joint Light Tactical
    Vehicles as a replacement are also ill-suited to this mission, except
    in certain convoy operations.
        Do you support efforts to replace this capability currently
    underway by the Air Force Global Strike Command with a more commercial
    solution?
        Answer. Yes, I support the efforts of Air Force Global Strike
    Command to review commercial replacement options. I support continued
    efforts to determine a suitable commercial replacement for daily site
    security in missile field operations.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
    continues its efforts to improve the training, readiness, morale,
    welfare, and quality of life of the airmen charged to execute and
    support the Air Force's nuclear mission?
        Answer. If confirmed, my top priorities will be strengthening both
    mission readiness and family support. To enhance our mission
    effectiveness, I will focus on fostering a warrior ethos and
    modernizing training through the integration of cutting-edge
    technologies. Simultaneously, I am committed to rebuilding vital
    support systems for military families. This includes expanding access
    to quality childcare, enhancing spouse employment assistance programs,
    and streamlining relocation support.
                     cruise missile defense of the homeland
        Question. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks designated Air
    Force as the DOD lead for developing a cruise missile defense
    architecture for the homeland in July 2022.
        Where is Air Force on finalizing an architecture?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
    Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
    Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
    contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
    and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
    the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
    systems to defend the homeland.
        Question. Has the Unified Command Plan realignment of Space Command
    as the global integrator for missile defense caused a course correction
    in this process?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
    Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
    Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
    contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
    and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
    the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
    systems to defend the Homeland.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps will you take to expedite the
    completion of a final architecture and develop an acquisition and
    fielding strategy for the defense system, as well as for the associated
    domain awareness and missile warning and tracking modernization
    capabilities?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
    Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
    Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
    contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
    and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
    the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
    systems to defend the Homeland.
        Question. In your view, how does this effort align with the
    President's recent ``Iron Dome for America'' executive order to develop
    a national integrated air and missile defense architecture?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
    Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
    Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
    contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
    and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
    the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
    systems to defend the Homeland.
                                    spectrum
        Question. Electromagnetic spectrum plays a critical role in many
    DOD missions.
        In what ways do the Air Force and Space Force rely on spectrum to
    support warfighter requirements? In your view, which warfighter
    spectrum requirements will be essential to competing with Russia and
    China on a future battlefield?
        Answer. The Air and Space Forces rely heavily on the
    electromagnetic spectrum for all warfighting functions, from
    communication and navigation to intelligence gathering and weapons
    systems. The ability to maintain assured access to and control of the
    electromagnetic spectrum will be essential for competing with
    sophisticated adversaries like Russia and China. To compete effectively
    with these nations, future warfighters will require resilient
    communication systems, effective air-and land-based radars, spectrum-
    agile weapons systems, advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and
    dynamic spectrum access tools for contested environments. Effective
    coordination and collaboration across services and with international
    allies will be vital for achieving spectrum dominance and maintaining a
    competitive edge.
        Question. In March 2023 testimony before the Senate Armed Services
    Committee, former Secretary of Defense Austin stated that, with respect
    to losing ``S-band'' spectrum, ``it [would] be devastating, . . . it
    would take us somewhere north of 20 years to try to recover from--from
    the loss of that--that spectrum. Parts of that spectrum are vital to
    our national defense and the protection of the homeland. And--and, you
    know, in order to describe exactly--well, you know what the--what the
    specific platforms are, but we would have to go to a classified session
    to speak in detail about this. But I would tell you that this is not
    something you can fix overnight once you break it. It'll take 20 years
    plus to recover from that.''
        In addition, with respect to the Secretary's statement, General
    Alvin stated when he was nominated to be Chief of Staff of the Air
    Force, ``I agree with previous testimony that has been provided by
    Secretary Austin that this would take decades.''
        Do you agree with the former Secretary of Defense and the Chief of
    Staff of the Air Force?
        Answer. To my knowledge, the S-band contains spectrum that is
    foundational to a wide range of critical Air and Space Force missions,
    including missile warning, satellite control, air defense radar
    operations, space tracking, counter-UAS, and testing against adversary
    threats. My understanding is that losing access to this band would
    severely degrade our ability to execute national security functions in
    both peacetime and conflict.
        It is also my understanding that recovery from such a loss would
    not be quick or easy. The risks to mission assurance and national
    defense in the interim would be profound.
        If confirmed, I will prioritize efforts to preserve and modernize
    the Department's access to the electromagnetic spectrum, especially in
    bands like S-band that are essential to our strategic advantage. I will
    also work to ensure the Department of the Air Force remains an active
    partner in national spectrum policy discussions, balancing national
    security requirements with broader spectrum demands.
        Question. Were DOD required to ``vacate'' or leave the ``Mid-Band''
    spectrum instead of sharing, what are the potential operational and
    dollar costs to the Air Force and Space Force, in your view? How long
    would a move to a different area of the spectrum take, in your view?
        Answer. If the DOD were required to vacate the mid-band spectrum
    instead of sharing it, estimating the potential operational and dollar
    costs to the Air Force and Space Force is impossible without first
    identifying available alternative spectrum and rigorously studying its
    suitability through scientific processes. Given that the physics of the
    mid-band cannot be replicated in other parts of the spectrum, finding a
    suitable alternative presents a significant technical challenge, with
    potentially significant implications for national security. This
    analysis is crucial to ensure the desired operational effects are
    maintained.
        Similarly, the time required for a transition to a different
    spectrum is dependent on the specific band chosen, industry's ability
    to manufacture components that operate in this range, and the
    complexity of migrating existing systems, and therefore the cost cannot
    be estimated until a suitable alternative frequency is identified and
    studied.
        Question. In your view, how would direction to DOD to vacate
    additional portions of spectrum affect the implementation of the
    President's ``Iron Dome for America'' executive order whose missile
    defense radars operate primarily in the S-band?
        Answer. Vacating any part of the S-band spectrum, especially
    frequencies crucial for missile defense radars, could severely hamper
    President Trump's ``Golden Dome for America'' initiative. Any decision
    regarding S-band reallocation must carefully weigh the benefits against
    the potential risks to missile defense capabilities. If confirmed, I
    will review the latest analysis and work with DOD CIO, Combatant
    Commanders, and the Congress to find the right balance to secure
    America's vital national security interests.
                      science, technology, and innovation
        Question. In your view, how have the Air Force and Space Force
    prioritized limited research and development funding across its
    technology focus areas? Specifically, where are the Air Force and Space
    Force either increasing or decreasing focus and funding?
        Answer. The Air Force and Space Force R&D communities have
    incredible opportunities to provide both new technologies to improve
    legacy platforms while providing leap-ahead capabilities in the near-
    and mid-term. Today's investment in R&D will ultimately determine who
    has the technological advantage in tomorrow's conflicts. If confirmed,
    I look forward to gaining additional insight into the Department's R&D
    portfolio to ensure investments in those areas are fully aligned with
    delivering the most lethal and impactful capabilities to the warfighter
    for both deterrence and armed conflict.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you improve efforts the Air Force
    and Space Force are making to identify new technologies developed
    commercially by the private sector and apply them to military and
    national security purposes?
        Answer. It is critical that the Air Force leverage those
    commercially developed technologies for military applications--where
    possible and with the proper safeguards in place--and utilize USAF
    investments for military unique technology development. There is
    untapped expertise throughout the commercial market--in the traditional
    Primes, the non-traditional companies, and the immense small business
    community. In a resource-constrained environment, the Department of the
    Air Force needs to pull every lever and turn every knob available to
    tap into the multi-billion-dollar market out there that is eager to
    contribute to protect America's equities and way of life. If confirmed,
    I plan to prioritize this and ensure the Air Force is leveraging every
    innovation possible.
        Question. How would you work to increase investments in research
    infrastructure through Air Force MILCON investments to match growing
    investments in China in research infrastructure in domains such as
    quantum science, hypersonics, and advanced materials?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the authorities granted by
    Congress under Title 10 will be utilized to their maximum extent, to
    include innovative uses of minor MILCON authorities to combat the
    rising costs of maintaining aging facilities and targeted modernization
    projects while working to increase the prioritization of major
    laboratory and test center facility requirements for MILCON funding for
    strategic investments by the USAF.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the limited Air
    Force science and technology budget is used for genuine science and
    technology technical challenges, and not to support more mature
    prototyping and development activities more appropriately addressed
    with other Air Force RDTE resources?
        Answer. Science and Technology (S&T) investments are focused on
    Basic Research, Applied Research, and Advanced Technology Development
    areas that need to be informed by and aligned to operational
    requirements and capability needs. If confirmed I look forward to
    reviewing how the current Air Force structure supports S&T
    prioritization and will work to ensure Air Force optimizes S&T
    resourcing, infrastructure, and expertise.
        Question. In your view, would the Air Force benefit from
    authorities that enable it to make use of expert foreign national
    talent in appropriate capacities and in appropriate settings to support
    modernization priorities and better compete with peer adversaries?
        Answer. I believe the Air Force, and indeed the broader national
    security enterprise, would benefit from carefully managed authorities
    that allow us to leverage the expertise of foreign nationals in
    appropriate capacities and settings. This talent pool can offer unique
    skills and perspectives crucial for advancing modernization priorities
    and maintaining a competitive edge against peer adversaries,
    particularly in critical technology areas. However, any such initiative
    must prioritize robust security protocols and rigorous vetting
    processes to safeguard sensitive information and protect national
    security interests. A balanced approach that leverages talent while
    mitigating risk is essential.
        Question. What incentives should the Air Force provide to
    universities and researchers to develop domestic technical talent and
    counter opportunities for researchers in critical fields being offered
    by peer adversaries, including China?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will carefully consider the need for
    incentives to encourage universities and researchers to develop
    domestic technical talent, particularly in critical fields where
    competition with peer adversaries is intense. This includes reviewing
    existing programs and exploring potential new approaches to ensure we
    can attract and retain the best and brightest minds to support the Air
    Force's mission.
                               operational energy
        Question. The Department defines operational energy as the energy
    required for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and
    weapons platforms for military operations, including the energy used by
    tactical power systems, generators, and weapons platforms. Longer
    operating distances, remote and austere geography, and anti-access/area
    denial threats are challenging DOD's ability to assure the delivery of
    fuel. As the ability to deliver energy is placed at risk, so too is the
    Department's ability to deploy and sustain expeditionary Air Force
    units around the globe.
        What are your ideas for future capabilities that would enable an
    expeditionary Air Force through the assured delivery of energy to the
    warfighter?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the DAF to pursue
    revolutionary future capabilities that deliver energy assurance and
    maximize combat capability in contested domains. To my knowledge, the
    DAF is using a public-private partnership to maximize return on
    investment for a Blended Wing Body (BWB) aircraft that will increase
    efficiency by 30 percent and offer solutions to multiple capability
    needs. I will also explore potential hybrid-electric aircraft and space
    solar power technologies that enable agile combat employment concepts
    for expeditionary forces. I will strengthen the linkages between DAF
    offices and industry to promote innovative future capabilities that
    assure the delivery of energy to the warfighter.
        Question. What are your ideas for reducing the risk associated with
    the Air Force's dependence on vulnerable supply lines?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure appropriate emphasis is placed
    upon energy supportability, specifically by ensuring holistic analysis
    of campaign-level energy consumption and addressing expected supply
    chain risks. I will optimize fuel use by exploring the viability of
    alternative propulsion systems for legacy aircraft, increased
    performance through better mission planning and execution software,
    improved aerodynamics through drag reduction technologies, and engine
    sustainment technologies that maximize lethality per gallon.
                           infrastructure challenges
        Question. Non-DOD funding mechanisms such as energy savings
    performance contracts, utility energy savings contracts, and power
    purchase agreements are excellent means by which the Air Force can
    improve infrastructure, increase resilience, reduced deferred
    maintenance, implement alternative energy resources, save taxpayer
    funds, and secure other benefits without upfront appropriated funds.
        If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline this process
    and how long would it take you to resume entering into contracts of
    this sort for the benefit of Air Force installations?
        Answer. If confirmed as Under Secretary, I will leverage all
    authorities, including third-party contracts, to bolster infrastructure
    and energy security. I will collaborate with OSD and DOE to streamline
    processes and expedite solutions.
                   air force-related defense industrial base
        Question. What is your assessment of the systems and processes for
    identifying, evaluating, and managing risk in the Air Force's organic
    and commercial defense industrial base, including the munitions
    industrial base?
        Answer. A strong Air Force requires understanding and managing
    defense industrial base risk. If confirmed, I will advance tools and
    processes to proactively identify supply chain risks and capacity
    bottlenecks, addressing them before crises arise.
        Question. What do you see as the levers to motivate the defense
    industrial base to make additional capital investment (for facilities
    and tooling), as well as research and development investments to
    increase the capacity of the defense industrial base?
        Answer. Industry relies on clear and consistent demand signal to
    determine where return on investment can be found. If confirmed, I will
    work within the Air Force and with Congress to incentivize capital
    investment in the industrial base.
        Question. How should Air Force acquisition leaders consider impacts
    on the industrial base when addressing requirements for
    recapitalization or modernization of major defense weapons systems and
    munitions?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will collaborate with Service Acquisition
    Executives to ensure acquisition strategies consider industrial base
    impacts, promoting competition, lowering barriers to entry, and
    incentivizing strategic investment and R&D.
        Question. How would you seek to ensure the Air Force engages with
    the broadest industrial base possible, including traditional
    contractors, nontraditional contractors, and small businesses?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Service Acquisition
    Executives to connect the Air Force with all supply chain tiers,
    including crucial small businesses. I will engage industry
    associations, state/local governments, and trade organizations to
    understand industrial base risks and constraints.
        Question. If confirmed, what changes, if any, would you pursue in
    systems and processes to ensure that risk in the Air Force-relevant
    sectors of the defense industrial base is adequately managed to enable
    the development, production, and sustainment of technically superior,
    reliable, and affordable weapons systems and munitions?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Service Acquisition
    Executives to proactively identify and address industrial base risks
    and bottlenecks. I will also ensure acquisition strategies promote
    competition, leverage Modular Open Systems Architectures, and
    prioritize producibility.
                      military health system (mhs) reform
        Question. Do you support the implementation of the MHS reforms
    mandated by the NDAAs for fiscal years 2017, 2019, and 2020?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the DHA as directed by
    Congress. The DAF remains a steadfast partner, providing leadership and
    project management to transfer programs and resources lawfully. Despite
    service-specific challenges, I will ensure DAF dedication to the
    Defense Health Agency and Military Treatment Facilities supporting Air
    Force and Space Force missions and community healthcare.
        Question. Will you ensure that the Air Force continues to provide
    the military medical personnel needed to provide care in military
    treatment facilities?
        Answer. I champion the MHS mission for a medically ready force and
    ready medical force--anytime, anywhere. Our servicemembers and families
    deserve the best care, and our medical personnel are key. If confirmed,
    I will review personnel strategy to ensure we recruit, access, and
    retain the right talent for this complex mission.
                             military compensation
        Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy of military
    compensation and benefits?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to a detailed review of
    military compensation, including the junior enlisted pay increase
    Congress enacted last year, to better understand which, if any, areas
    may need revision to allow for a more targeted approach to the overall
    compensation package.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to control the
    rising cost of military personnel?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review DAF personnel costs, drivers of
    growth, and potential savings while maintaining our ability to attract
    and retain talent.
                         non-deployable servicemembers
        Question. Do you agree that airmen and guardians who are non-
    deployable for more than 12 consecutive months should be subject either
    to separation from the Army or referral into the Disability Evaluation
    System?
        Answer. Readiness is paramount. If confirmed, I will align non-
    deployment policies with Air Force priorities, prioritizing readiness
    and mission needs. Individual circumstances will be considered, but
    operational strength and deployability are key. I will ensure our
    forces remain ready.
        Question. In your view, under what circumstances might the
    retention of a servicemember who has been non-deployable for more than
    12 months be in the best interest of the Department of the Air Force?
        Answer. I lack sufficient information to speculate. If confirmed, I
    will work with DAF leaders to understand the current approach and
    consider Air Force mission and readiness requirements.
                               suicide prevention
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to prevent
    suicides in the Active Air Force, the Air Force Reserve, and the Air
    National Guard, and in the families of airmen across all components?
        Answer. The Air Force must promote mental well-being, eliminate
    barriers to care, and destigmatize seeking help. This enhances
    lethality, readiness, and warrior ethos. If confirmed, I will support
    the Brandon Act and evidence-based programs improving mental health
    access.
         sexual harassment and assault prevention and response programs
        Question. Do you believe the policies, programs, resources, and
    training that DOD and the Military Services have put in place to
    prevent and respond to sexual assault, and to protect servicemembers
    who report sexual assault from retaliation, are working? If not, what
    else must be done?
        Answer. As a private citizen who previously served in leadership
    roles in the Air and Space Forces, I see significant emphasis on ending
    sexual violence in our Services. Sexual assault harms our airmen and
    guardians and has a direct impact on readiness, demanding our
    attention. If confirmed, I will review related policies, programs,
    resources, and training for effectiveness, including retaliation
    protection for reporters.
        Question. What is your view of the necessity of affording a victim
    both restricted and unrestricted options to report sexual harassment?
        Answer. Restricted and unrestricted reporting offer victims
    confidential help or official reporting. These options allow the DAF to
    tailor support to individual needs.
                      space force personnel management act
        Question. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
    2024 authorized the Space Force to combine all Active and Reserve
    component guardians into a single, full-time/part-time, component.
        In your judgment, how will this novel military personnel
    arrangement benefit the Space Force?
        Answer. I have been informed that the Space Force Personnel
    Management Act (PMA) directs the Space Force to design and implement an
    alternative military personnel management system without components.
    This unified service will offer guardians the ability to serve in both
    full-time and part-time work roles and transition between them based on
    individual preferences and the needs of the Space Force. This authority
    benefits the Space Force by providing unique talent management
    opportunities extending the continuum of service without service
    interruption, attracting and retaining talent, and ultimately enhancing
    military readiness and lethality.
        Question. How will you ensure former members of the Air Force
    Reserve and Air National Guard are not disadvantaged by joining the
    Space Force under this new construct?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Space Force is working closely
    with the AFR and ANG on a phased implementation plan to transfer space
    aligned missions, billets, resources, and personnel. The PMA ensures
    that guardians serving in full-time and part-time work roles are
    treated the same as similarly situated members of regular and Reserve
    components, respectfully. If confirmed, I will review the
    implementation plan and work to ensure that members of the ARC and ANG
    are not disadvantaged in any way by volunteering to the Space Force.
        Question. The Committee understands that personnel information
    technology systems are the main obstacle preventing the Space Force
    from implementing the Space Force Personnel Management Act
    expeditiously.
        If confirmed, how will you assist the Space Force acquire the
    necessary technology required to implement the Space Force Personnel
    Management Act?
        Answer. The Space Force Personnel Management Act provides the
    authority the Space Force needs to develop and implement a modern
    military personnel system. It is my understanding that integration with
    the legacy DAF and OSD personnel IT systems is one of the most
    challenging lines of effort for implementing the PMA. If confirmed, I
    will review the Space Force's resourcing and technology requirements
    unhindered throughout the multi-year implementation process to ensure
    that they meet congressional intent and take care of our guardians.
        Question. Section 514 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
    Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
    requires the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer to the Space Force
    the covered space functions and personnel of the Air National Guard.
        What is you understanding of when the transfer of the covered units
    and equipment to the Space Force will occur, and what is the associated
    plan for transferring personnel?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Space Force, Air Force, and
    National Guard leadership to develop a comprehensive plan for
    transferring covered space functions and personnel who choose to
    transfer from the Air National Guard to the Space Force within the
    transition timeline established by Congress.
             air force integrated pay and personnel system (afipps)
        Question. The Committee is aware that the AFIPPS program continues
    to struggle with significant schedule delays and cost overruns. This
    program is essential for the Air Force to implement modern personnel
    policy and for Air Force audit requirements.
        What is your view of the importance of AFIPPS?
        Answer. I understand AFIPPS modernizes DAF personnel and pay. If
    confirmed, I will seek a detailed program briefing and, if needed,
    collaborate with DAF leadership on a finalization strategy.
        Question. If confirmed, what will you do to ensure AFIPPS delivers
    the promised capability according to latest schedule and cost
    estimates?
        Answer. Caring for our people is paramount. If confirmed, I will
    work with DAF leadership to understand this program's status and future
    needs.
                 department of the air force civilian workforce
        Question. How would you describe the current State of the
    Department of the Air Force (including the Space Force) civilian
    workforce, including its morale and the Department's ability to
    successfully recruit and retain top civilian talent?
        Answer. Civilians are vital to military readiness. If confirmed, I
    will ensure the Department prioritizes hiring top talent for
    warfighting-critical positions. I will also review the work environment
    and employee engagement, adjusting as needed.
        Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
    the Air Force and Space Force in effectively and efficiently managing
    their civilian workforce?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leadership to understand
    workforce management challenges. I will maximize congressional hiring
    and compensation flexibilities, fostering a meritocratic, innovative
    culture. I will commit to reviewing personnel processes for civilian
    workforce management efficiencies.
        Question. In your view, do Air Force and Space Force supervisors
    have adequate authorities to address and remediate employee misconduct
    and poor duty performance, and ultimately to divest of a civilian
    employee who fails to meet requisite standards of conduct and
    performance?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to hiring and retaining the
    have the best people. If I am confirmed, I will review the
    effectiveness of the numerous personnel management authorities and
    systems and explore greater efficiencies. The Department must make
    every effort to create a future-ready, agile and adaptive workforce
    able to meet the rapidly evolving challenges of the 21st century.
        Question. If so, are both civilian and military supervisors
    adequately trained to exercise such authorities? If not, what
    additional authorities or training do Air Force and Space Force
    supervisors require?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to making sure the Department
    continues to have the best people and that supervisors are properly
    trained. If I am confirmed, I will review the effectiveness of the
    numerous personnel management authorities and systems and explore
    greater efficiencies. The Department must make every effort to create a
    future-ready, agile and adaptive workforce able to meet the rapidly
    evolving challenges of the 21st century.
                            senior executive service
        Question. Given that competent and caring leadership is one of the
    most significant factors in shaping a high-performing DOD civilian
    workforce, if confirmed, what factors and characteristics would be most
    important to you in selecting candidates for appointment to the Senior
    Executive Service?
        Answer. The Senior Executive Service is vital and if confirmed, I
    will prioritize candidates with proven competence, strong character and
    a commitment to a more efficient and effective Department.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that SES under your
    authority are held accountable for both organizational performance and
    the rigorous performance management of their subordinate employees?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will focus on ensuring the Senior Executive
    Service is held accountable for achieving results. This involves
    supporting SES leaders in fostering a culture of excellence within
    their organizations. My leadership will emphasize clear expectations,
    measurable outcomes, and consistent performance evaluations. High
    achievers will be recognized, and underperformance will be addressed.
        Question. Are you satisfied with the subject matter and rigor of
    SES professional development programs currently available across DOD
    and in the Air Force and Space Force? If not, what changes would you
    make to these programs, if confirmed?
        Answer. Professional development for our Senior Executive Service
    (SES) cadre is critical to ensuring we have the strategic leadership
    required for the complex challenges facing the Air and Space Forces. If
    confirmed, I will review the DAF SES professional development programs
    to ensure alignment with the DOD and DAF priorities.
             domestic violence and child abuse in military families
        Question. What is your understanding of the extent of domestic
    violence and child abuse in the Air Force, and, if confirmed, what
    actions would you take to address these issues?
        Answer. I take the health and well-being of the force and our
    military families extremely seriously. I recognize that domestic
    violence and child abuse are serious issues that have no place, but do
    exist. Domestic violence is a serious problem that impacts readiness in
    the Department of the Air Force. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring
    these issues are receiving the attention they deserve and the necessary
    resources to support effective prevention and response.
                            military quality of life
        Question. If confirmed, what quality of life and morale, welfare,
    and recreation (MWR) programs would you consider to be a priority?
        Answer. MWR programs are a necessity and go a long way toward
    improving quality of life for military members and their families,
    especially when stationed far from home. Fostering resilient and ready
    families directly impacts readiness, recruitment, and retention of
    military members. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
    understand which programs are high in demand, and where new programs
    may need to be introduced based on community needs.
        Question. What metric would you apply in determining which MWR and
    quality of life programs should be sustained or enriched and which
    should be eliminated or reduced in scope as ineffective or outmoded?
        Answer. MWR and quality of life are critical factors in readiness
    and enable recruitment and retention. If confirmed, I will work with
    senior leaders to conduct a review of existing MWR and quality of life
    programs to assess the effectiveness of these programs in supporting
    readiness.
                     military family readiness and support
        Question. What do you consider to be the most important family
    readiness issues for servicemembers and their families?
        Answer. We recruit airmen and guardians but retain families. Press
    reports suggest compensation, spousal employment, childcare, and food
    insecurity challenge families. If confirmed, I will work with DAF
    leaders to identify key challenges, assess existing support, and
    develop enhanced strategies, advocating for necessary resources.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
    ensure that military families are provided with accessible, high-
    quality childcare, at an appropriate cost?
        Answer. Military readiness requires affordable, quality childcare.
    If confirmed, I will collaborate with DAF leaders to evaluate current
    initiatives and explore opportunities to expand childcare options--
    traditional, non-traditional, and community-based--for our airmen and
    guardians.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
    appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications) and other information from the Department.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
    of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
    briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
    communications), and other information as may be requested of you, and
    to do so in a timely manner? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
    committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
    basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
    reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
    and other information requested of you? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
    Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
    materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
    records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
    information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
    request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees with records
    and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
    a formal Committee request? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
    you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
    this committee? Please answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
    retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
    employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
    subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
    answer yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                                 8(a) contracts
        1. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, the Small Business Act (SBA)
    8(a) program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through
    which sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small
    businesses owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
    Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
    corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
    classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
    earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
    (CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
    rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
    to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
    to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
    Department of the Defense?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if confirmed, I will work with Congress, the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Department of the Air Force
    Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB), and interagency partners
    such as SBA on improving, preserving, and strengthening Section 8(a)
    contracting and other Small Business Programs whenever using them would
    be in the best interest of the Department of the Air Force. I
    understand that the Section 8(a) Program and other Small Business
    Programs have served as valuable tools for supporting the warfighters
    and strengthening the defense industrial base while streamlining and
    expediting defense acquisitions.

        2. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
    contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
    Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
    mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
    warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
    buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
    flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
    you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
    initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, I understand that the Section 8(a) Program and
    other Small Business Programs have served as valuable tools for
    supporting the warfighters and strengthening the defense industrial
    base while streamlining and expediting defense acquisitions. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with the Department of the Air
    Force Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB) on promoting the use
    of flexible and efficient contracting methods that Congress established
    for Small Business Programs.

        3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, rapid response capabilities are
    essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
    same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
    our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
    efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
    to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
    and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
    Department of Defense.
        Mr. Lohmeier. By law and guidance, the Under Secretary of the Air
    Force directly supervises the Director, Department of the Air Force
    Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB). If confirmed, I will ask
    the Director, SAF/SB, to recommend actions that I can take as the Under
    Secretary to ensure that Small Business Programs such as the Section
    8(a) Program remain available to Department of the Air Force for
    supporting warfighters and strengthening the defense industrial base
    while streamlining and expediting defense acquisitions.
        I will further work with Congress, the Office of the Secretary of
    Defense, the Department of the Air Force Office of Small Business
    Programs (SAF/SB), and interagency partners such as SBA on improving,
    preserving, and strengthening Section 8(a) contracting and other Small
    Business Programs whenever using them would be in the best interest of
    the Department of the Air Force.
                                     alaska
        4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, on President Trump's first day
    in office, he signed the Executive Order ``Unleashing Alaska's
    Extraordinary Resource Potential.'' This sent a strong message to
    Alaska, America, and the world, that unleashing Alaska's extraordinary
    resources and jobs in a growing economy is one of his Administration's
    top priorities. For years, I've worked toward the success of the Alaska
    LNG project. Not only could Alaska LNG shipments provide our allies
    with energy security, reaching them in 6 days without any strategic
    choke points, but this pipeline crosses directly through some of our
    most prominent military bases in my State, several of which have had
    issues with supply. Now, purchase agreements and other ways to commit
    to the project, beyond just the Department of Defense's (DOD) immediate
    need, will help secure financing for the project quickly and at the
    lowest cost in line with President Trump's America First Energy and
    National Security agenda. Can I get your commitment to work with me on
    the Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and other
    stakeholders to identify and support projects that enhance the energy
    security of our installations in Alaska and everywhere the Department
    operates.[PD1]

        5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, Eielson Air Force Base (AFB)
    which in addition to being home to F-35 squadrons, F-16 interceptors,
    and KC-135s along with hosting many nations each year for Red Flag
    events, still needs many more ``warm'' facilities to house KC-135
    airframes. It can only fit two right now. Additionally, other
    infrastructure is very outdated, and facilities are not keeping pace
    with Wainwright Army base. Will you work with me to acquire the
    infrastructure necessary to hold the tankers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will ensure infrastructure
    requirements at Eielson AFB are properly assessed and prioritized to
    support the critical missions being conducted from the installation.

        6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, my State holds the highest
    concentration of combat-coded fifth generation aircraft anywhere else
    in the country (over 100). Any conflict in the Indo-Pacific region will
    undoubtedly call upon Alaskan warfighters and our military assets. For
    the last decade I've pressed every Chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
    Secretary of the Air Force, and Chief of Staff of the Air Force on the
    need for more aerial refueling assets in Alaska to support the
    increasing training requirements and intercept missions.
        Last year, I wrote a letter to your predecessor, Secretary Kendall,
    pressing him to fulfill the Air Force's commitments on this issue and
    Kendall replied with a signed memorandum finally codifying the movement
    of 4x KC-135s to Eielson AFB in so called ``active association''. This
    MUST NOT be delayed any longer.
        Can I get your commitment that, if confirmed, you will see the
    completion of that KC-135 basing through to the end?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to addressing previous
    basing decisions at Eielson AFB. The tanker fleet is an essential
    component of U.S. power projection, Homeland Defense, strategic
    deterrence, global strike, rapid global mobility, and coordinated Joint
    Force and coalition efforts. The Air Force will work closely with
    theater MAJCOMs to ensure we source the three remaining KC-135 for
    Eielson in a deliberate, efficient, and timely manner and commit to
    providing you updates.

        7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, can I also get your commitment
    to work expedite the delivery time and increase the readiness rates of
    the KC-46?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that the KC-46 is replacing a large
    portion of the Air Force's tanker fleet and that it is progressing
    toward full operational capability. If confirmed, I commit to working
    with the Service Acquisition Executive and Boeing to resolve issues and
    get us on the shortest path to delivering aircraft that fully meet
    warfighter requirements.

        8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, in our discussion in my office
    we spoke about the need for additional hangar and infrastructure
    capability at Deadhorse (near Prudhoe Bay) to help extend the Air
    Force's reach in the Arctic. The U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM)
    Commander, General Gregory Guillot, as well as the U.S. Pacific Air
    Forces (PACAF) Commander, General Kevin Schneider, have both expressed
    interest in this location. Will you work with me, if confirmed, to get
    the military construction approved to support operations out of
    Deadhorse?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The Arctic is critical to our ability to defend the
    homeland and project power internationally. If confirmed, I commit to
    continuing to evaluate our posture in Alaska, and I will work with
    Congress to ensure the Department has sufficient infrastructure to
    support its missions and operations.

        9. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, the 18th Fighter Interceptor
    Squadron (FIS) at Eielson AFB is responsible for interception of
    Russian and Chinese strategic bombers and fighters that cross into the
    Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). Oftentimes, however,
    the 18th FIS is short of either pilots or mechanics to accomplish their
    mission. They always do accomplish the mission, but often at great
    extra cost in manpower and time (especially as intercepts have
    increased in the last year). Will you commit to looking at the task
    organization and real-life manning of this unit and its sustainers and
    ensure that they are manned 100 percent to finish their mission?
        Mr. Lohmeier. As the Air Force works to align with OSD on optimal
    organizations toward the overall mission of warfighting, I am committed
    to looking at all task organizations and real-life manning of all
    fighter units and their sustainers to ensure they are effectively
    manned to accomplish their mission.

        10. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, as you are aware I've been
    fighting to get the KC-135 Active Association complete at Eielson AFB
    for nearly a decade and your predecessor signed off on it. I appreciate
    your commitment during your hearing to see this through to completion.
    I've ran into a number of issues with the Air Force Site Activation
    Task Force (SATF) which has visited Eielson nearly six times to conduct
    housing surveys. It appears they are using housing data from 2023 to
    make decisions regarding the amount of available housing at Eielson.
    Will you commit to work with me to ensure that SATF is using the most
    current housing data to inform its decisions about housing at Eielson
    and to relook the Air Force's housing requirements as soon as possible
    to ensure we are meeting mission need at the base?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes if, confirmed, I will review the housing data
    being used by the DAF to inform housing requirements and ensure we are
    using the most current data.

        11. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, as part of President Trump's
    Golden Dome program, there will almost certainly be a need to ensure
    that our advanced early warning radar systems like the E-7 are capable
    of detecting incoming aircraft and missile threats both at home and if
    necessary, forward deployed. We have had a number of issues in Alaska
    with E-3 AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System] readiness rates
    due to aging airframes and parts. Will you commit to reviewing the E-7
    program to make sure we are properly resourcing it and work with me to
    ensure that we have that capability on hand when required in Alaska?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that enhanced airborne Battle Management
    Command and Control (BMC2) and Airborne Moving Target Indicator (AMTI)
    capabilities are essential to countering advanced and emerging
    adversary air threats. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing the program
    and working with the Service Acquisition Executive and the warfighter
    to ensure we can deliver this generational advancement in radar
    technology to replace the increasingly unreliable and unsustainable E-
    3G.

        12. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, one of the results of President
    Biden's energy policies and the ``lock up'' of my State through his
    executive orders is an energy emergency affecting our national security
    that is unfolding on some Alaska bases. I spoke to Secretary Peter
    Hegseth recently about this issue and explained to him that there have
    been a number of instances where commanders of bases like Joint Base
    Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) in Anchorage had to tell servicemembers and
    their families to turn down their heat, unplug personal property, and
    turn-off certain critical systems that sustain the base. This was done
    to preserve electricity and avoid brownouts in the region. Would U.S.
    national security be enhanced if there was a reliable source of clean-
    burning Alaskan natural gas available to supply the energy needs of
    these bases?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Expanding our access to available, but underutilized,
    sources of energy, such as natural gas is important to power our
    installations and achieve national energy dominance. If confirmed, I
    will work with OSD, the Department of Energy, the Department of
    Interior, and other stakeholders, such as our utility partners, to
    identify potential solutions to ensure our installations have the power
    they need to meet critical mission requirements.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
                         character and fitness to serve
        13. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, your public record raises serious
    concerns about your judgment, professionalism, and ability to maintain
    an apolitical, unified military. Given your track record of promoting
    partisan conspiracy theories, why should this Committee believe you are
    suddenly willing--or even able--to separate your personal politics from
    your official duties?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I am very proud of my military service which ended
    with an honorable discharge. During my time in Service and for every
    day after as a private citizen, I have been a champion for an
    apolitical military and will continue to be. If confirmed, I commit to
    dedicating myself to preserving a non-partisan Department of the Air
    Force. I believe very strongly that protecting the institution from
    partisanship is fundamental to our system of government.

        14. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, you have publicly suggested that
    addressing racism, sexism, and extremism in the ranks is somehow more
    dangerous than the extremism itself. How do you expect to build trust--
    particularly among LGBTQ+ servicemembers, servicemembers of color, and
    women--when your own statements dismiss the very real barriers they
    face?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My record shows an unblemished career of working with
    airmen and guardians from all walks of life. Some of the best guardians
    under my command in the Space Force were members of the LGBTQ+
    community and I have publicly stated that for the record when
    testifying before Congress in 2024. Unity is our strength, and I firmly
    believe my record reflects a leadership style focused on that unity--
    not division. If confirmed, I will continue to lead that way in the
    Department of the Air Force.
                             apolitical environment
        15. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, civil-military relations are
    foundational to the legitimacy of our Armed Forces. In this leadership
    position, how would you enforce the Department of Defense's strict
    prohibitions on political activity among Air Force and Space Force
    personnel, including under title 10 authorities, to preserve an
    apolitical military chain of command?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is well understood that servicemembers' political
    activities are regulated, both in their official and personal
    capacities. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech and permits
    the expression of ideas for all Americans; however, servicemembers,
    owing to their critical role in our national security, have accepted
    limits on their freedom of expression. Strict regulations on political
    activities among servicemembers ensure that personal political beliefs
    do not interfere with mission readiness or decisionmaking. Those
    safeguards protect the armed forces from external political pressures,
    ensuring their primary focus remains on national security and defense.
    I expect all DAF servicemembers to prudently exercise their individual
    liberties consistent with these obligations of military service. Those
    servicemembers who fail to abide by these regulations will be addressed
    as appropriate, including through potential administrative or
    disciplinary action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
                    acquisitions and supply chain challenges
        16. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, the Under Secretary must oversee
    major acquisition programs and help safeguard the defense industrial
    base, including partnerships with small businesses and innovation hubs.
    Given recent supply chain disruptions and consolidation within the
    defense industry, what concrete actions would you take to ensure
    competition, speed, and resilience in Air Force and Space Force
    acquisitions?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is important that the Department of Air Force
    continues to increase efforts to take full advantage of the speed,
    innovation, and capabilities offered by the commercial sector and the
    competitive defense industrial base. If confirmed, I will partner with
    my DOD counterparts and work with Congress to help ensure the
    Department of the Air Force has the tools and resources to explore
    flexible acquisitions to add speed, resilience, and increased program
    execution efficiency while cultivating secure supply chains, addressing
    workforce readiness, and utilizing economic deterrence as a tool to
    protect our industrial and innovation base. I will also review current
    commercial strategy and policy to ensure the Department is empowering
    collaboration with domestic industry to grow the industrial base and
    streamline technology maturation to satisfy emerging operational needs.
                               budget stewardship
        17. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, the Under Secretary of the Air
    Force plays a critical role in the development and execution of the
    Department's more than $200 billion annual budget. Can you walk this
    Committee through your approach to balancing modernization priorities,
    like Next Generation Air Dominance--against current operational
    readiness?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The primary challenge the DAF faces today lies in
    creating the force we need to defeat our future adversaries while not
    undercutting our ability to fight tonight. The Air Force is the
    smallest and oldest it has ever been, and it needs to move ahead on
    modernization to face the growing threat by investing in such
    capabilities as F-47, Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), High Value
    Air Asset (HVAA) protection, Air Base Air Defense (ABAD), and Long-
    Range Kill Chain (LRKC). The USSF needs to grow in capacity and
    capability, in mission areas such as Space Based Sensing and Targeting,
    Counter-C5ISRT, Missile Warning, PNT, and SATCOM, with additional
    lethal and resilient capabilities, including additional guardians to
    develop, operate, and sustain those systems, to deter and prevail in a
    complex competition with China.
                                   __________
                    Questions Submitted by Senator Tim Kaine
               characterization of the events of january 6, 2021
        18. Senator Kaine. Mr. Lohmeier, did you author the social media
    post below?

        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, and at the time of this post I had been out of
    uniform for several years. I authored this as a private citizen freely
    expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. It does not reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force, if confirmed.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
                                     ethics
        19. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
    contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
    as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        20. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
    ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
    consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
    years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        21. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit not to seek
    employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
    from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
    government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
    forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
    from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
    Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
    that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
    public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
    my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
    full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        22. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, during your nomination process,
    did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
    related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        23. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you were approached about your
    loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or other
    similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that pledge
    or oath.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached about my loyalty
    to President Trump.

        24. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you were approached about your
    loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal representations of
    loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached about my loyalty
    to President Trump.

        25. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, in November 2024, the New York
    Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
    adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
    prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
    positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
    joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        26. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you did discuss the
    possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
    Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
    position within the Administration?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached.

        27. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, at any time, did lawyers for
    President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
    regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
    describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
    documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
    information pertaining to this interaction.
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        28. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, were you in contact with Mr. Elon
    Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please describe
    the nature of those contacts.
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        29. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, was Mr. Musk present or involved
    in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
    describe the nature of his involvement.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I am a nominee of the President of the United States,
    and in the interview process, the President asked me questions. I'm
    extremely honored that President Trump had the faith and confidence to
    nominate me for the position of Under Secretary of the Air Force.

        30. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
    with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
    indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, not to my knowledge.

        31. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, who was in the room or
    participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Various staffers were present for my interview,
    including staffers from the Presidential Personnel Office and the
    Department of Defense. I'm extremely honored that President Trump had
    the faith and confidence to nominate me for the position of Under
    Secretary of the Air Force.

        32. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you own any stock or hold any
    other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
    to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The Ethics Agreement I signed on March 14, 2025,
    which was previously provided to the Committee, sets forth my ethics
    commitments, if confirmed.

        33. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you consider the role of
    the press in a democracy?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The freedom of the press is protected under the First
    Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I firmly believe that a free and
    open press is an essential element to the functioning of a legitimate
    democracy.

        34. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think it would be an
    appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
    who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
    administration?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        35. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit not to retaliate,
    including by denying access to government officials or facilities,
    against news outlets or individual journalists who publish articles
    that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the Trump
    administration?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        36. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you requested, or has anyone
    requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party sign a
    nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar agreement
    regarding your conduct in a personal or professional capacity?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        37. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you voluntarily release any
    individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I have not requested such agreements,
    nor has anyone done so on my behalf.

        38. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you ever paid or promised to
    pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
    individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
    disparagement, or similar agreement?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        39. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the answer to the previous
    question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
    were the circumstances?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable.

        40. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to recuse
    yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
    employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The Ethics Agreement I signed on March 14, 2025,
    which was previously provided to the Committee, sets forth my ethics
    commitments, if confirmed.

        41. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please provide a list of all your
    clients at Lohmeier Consulting LLC within the last 5 years.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Lohmeier Consulting LLC is the name of a Single-
    Member/Sole Proprietorship LLC that I created three and a half years
    ago at the time I separated from Active Duty in September 2021. I had
    no standing or permanent clients. My clients consisted of various local
    event organizers (often volunteer based non-profits) in states across
    the country (such as Arizona Women of Action, in Arizona) who would
    reach out asking if I would speak at events they had organized.
    Sometimes those events included an honorarium and sometimes I spoke at
    no cost.
                    congressional oversight and transparency
        42. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
    role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
    Inspectors General?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Inspectors General promote integrity and
    accountability throughout the Department by investigating allegations
    of fraud, waste, and abuse, and misconduct. IGs also serve as a
    confidential avenue for reporting wrongdoing and protecting
    whistleblowers. Their oversight helps maintain public trust and ensures
    the Department operates effectively and ethically. Crucially, they
    provide impartial recommendations to the Secretary of Defense and
    Congress based on their findings, driving necessary reforms and
    improvements within the Department. By identifying systemic issues and
    holding individuals accountable, the Inspector General system
    contributes directly to a more efficient, effective, trustworthy,
    ready, and lethal defense apparatus.

        43. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you ensure your staff
    complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
    communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        44. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are not able to comply
    with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
    Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
    for any good faith delay or denial?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        45. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
    including the President?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, and I do not believe the President would issue
    an illegal order.

        46. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what actions would you take if
    you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
    President?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I reject the premise of this question. The President
    would never order me to take an illegal action. If confirmed, I would
    work with appropriate personnel such as the General Counsel's Office if
    given a directive that I believed was illegal.

        47. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to voluntarily
    provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        48. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to voluntarily
    testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        49. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to testify or
    provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
    to do so?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.

        50. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to providing
    information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
    to do so?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if permitted under governing laws and
    regulations.

        51. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you provide information or
    documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if permitted under governing laws and
    regulations.

        52. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to following
    current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
    and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
    Services Committees and their minority members?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information as I am not familiar
    with the full extent of current precedent. However, if confirmed, I
    commit to being responsive to this Committee and this Congress.

        53. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, will you commit to
    posting your official calendar monthly?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to meeting all legal
    disclosure requirements.

        54. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think the Federal
    Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
    examples of overclassification you have encountered.
        Mr. Lohmeier. In general, I believe enabling access to information
    rapidly and as broadly as possible is vital to national security. If
    confirmed, I commit to working with the Secretary as well as my
    colleagues throughout the Department to ensure data is properly
    classified.

        55. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you think your
    department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
    declassification?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I am not familiar with these strategic technologies,
    but, if confirmed, I commit to receiving a brief on what options may be
    available to the Department.
                                  project 2025
        56. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
    transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        57. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.
                               foreign influence
        58. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you received any payment
    from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
    within the past 5 years?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        59. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you communicated with any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I have provided relevant information in connection
    with my background check.

        60. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please disclose any
    communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I have provided relevant information in connection
    with my background check.
                            impoundment control act
        61. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe the Secretary of
    Defense, or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block
    the disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I fully acknowledge and respect Congress'
    constitutional role in appropriating funds to be carried out by the
    executive branch for designated purposes. I commit, if confirmed, to
    executing my responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. I would ensure that my actions and advice to the Secretary of
    Defense on this matter are informed by the Administration's legal
    positions and advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        62. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
    Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My understanding is that Congress passed the
    Impoundment Control Act in 1974. This Act provides a framework for
    handling circumstances in which the President seeks to defer or cancel
    execution of appropriated funds. I commit, if confirmed, to executing
    my responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on
    this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice
    to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        63. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to complying with
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.

        64. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to notifying the
    Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
    minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
    Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
    authorizes?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to complying with applicable
    legal requirements regarding responding to requests from Congress.

        65. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, the Constitution's Spending
    Clause (Art. I, Sec.  8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
    Sec.  9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
    The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
    that impoundments are constitutional?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
    this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
    advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        66. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, the funding levels in
    appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
    instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
    stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
    discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
    this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
    advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        67. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
    requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes and
    appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress deems it
    to do so?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
    this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
    advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        68. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to expending the
    money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
    matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
    this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
    advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.

        69. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to following and
    implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
    Authorization Act passed into law?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.

        70. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you became aware of a
    potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
    or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.
                            research and development
        71. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, does the Federal Government
    benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. By partnering with colleges, universities,
    nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers, the
    Federal Government leverages unique analytical, engineering, and
    research capabilities and cutting-edge facilities that complement our
    own Federal workforce and laboratory infrastructure. Active
    partnerships with academia also build the pipeline for future Federal
    scientists and engineers with the competency to take on the hard
    technical problems associated with developing military technologies to
    support our warfighters.

        72. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, under your leadership, will your
    agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers to research and
    address our toughest national security challenges?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will support these strategic
    partnerships as a force multiplier to our DOD-internal workforce. The
    scientists, engineers, and researchers in colleges, universities,
    nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers
    possess world-unique expertise and facilities in many areas where the
    government cannot attract and retain personnel in sufficient depth and
    numbers. I understand these partnerships are an important enabler to
    the DOD's enduring technological superiority both domestically and
    abroad.
                        information air dominance center
        73. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you support the Air Force
    creating a new Information Dominance Center?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding that the intent of the IDSC is
    to consolidate and increase Air Force focus on information dominance
    capabilities, including Command, Control, Communications, and Battle
    Management (C3BM); Cyber; Electromagnetic[DC2] Warfare (EW);
    Information Systems; and Enterprise Digital Infrastructure. If
    confirmed, I look forward to receiving an in-depth briefing on this
    reorganization effort, reviewing the data and analysis behind it, and
    making my own assessment.

        74. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you see as the role of a
    new Information Dominance Systems Center in supporting great power
    competition?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding that the intent of the IDSC is
    to consolidate and increase Air Force focus on information dominance
    capabilities, including Command, Control, Communications, and Battle
    Management (C3BM); Cyber; Electromagnetic Warfare (EW); Information
    Systems; and Enterprise Digital Infrastructure. If confirmed, I look
    forward to better understanding the role of the IDSC and making my own
    assessment on how it would support the priorities outlined in the
    Interim National Security Guidance.
             protecting classified information and federal records
        75. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
    need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
        Mr. Lohmeier. OPSEC is of paramount importance and is everyone's
    responsibility in the Department of Defense. As a U.S Air Force and U.S
    Space Force veteran, I have a strong record of practicing OPSEC to
    protect information [M(3]and encouraging all members of my organization
    to do likewise.

        76. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what are the national security
    risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Improper disclosure of classified information could
    cause irreparable damage to national security, endanger personnel,
    compromise military operations, weaken national defenses, and point to
    potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Additionally, it can damage
    international trust and confidence in the U.S., leading to a weakening
    of alliances and reduced willingness to share sensitive information.
    And, in line with General Caine's testimony, we should always strive to
    preserve the element of surprise.

        77. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what would you do if you learned
    an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I would follow National Security protocols to address
    mishandling of classified information and mitigate risks. When such a
    disclosure is brought to my attention, I would consult with my security
    and classification management team and legal counsel and request an
    investigation be conducted to assess any damage, with the results from
    the investigation be provided to leadership and the Department for any
    pending action.

        78. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
    government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is the responsibility of every government official
    to safeguard government activities and transactions in accordance with
    the laws and regulations. The DAF implements the Federal Records Act
    working closely with other Federal agencies such as the National
    Archives and Records Administration. The Department is actively
    pursuing a Federal Records Act initiative to modernize strategies as
    well as improving overall processes via technology, such as
    implementing tagging for records data, automating record filing, and
    utilizing eDiscovery processes to retrieve records within records
    schedules--ensuring compliance and easing the burdens on our airmen and
    guardians.

        79. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, should classified information be
    shared on unclassified commercial systems?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.
                   retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
        80. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that
    servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
    protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
    illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
    any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
    protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
    laws.

        81. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you ever retaliated against
    any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
    assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
    that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No.

        82. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
    do so.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
    protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
    laws.

        83. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
    forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
    negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
    protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
    laws.

        84. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
    advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
    their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
    decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
    protected activity?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information based on this
    question to provide an answer. However, I believe in following all
    laws, including those protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit
    to following all laws.

        85. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
    prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
    individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
    actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
    to that individual engaging in protected activity?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information based on this
    question to provide an answer. However, I believe in following all
    laws, including those protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit
    to following all laws.

        86. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you support President Trump's
    proposal to create a board to review and purge three-and four-star
    officers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I am not familiar with any discussions regarding such
    a board. Under our system of government, the civilian leadership must
    remain in a higher position hierarchically than the military
    leadership. As such, I believe that civilian leadership has a right to
    choose their advisors.

        87. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you support President Trump's
    proposal to create a board to review and purge three-and four-star
    officers, what criteria would you use for any board to review three-and
    four-star officers to determine whether these officers are fit for
    leadership and for selecting who will be appointed to be the board?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I am not familiar with any such board
    or discussions about such a board.

        88. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you or do you plan to
    recommend the Trump administration remove specific officers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No. If confirmed, my focus will be on assisting the
    Secretary of the Air Force with their title 10 responsibility to
    organize, train, and equip the Department of the Air Force.

        89. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your justification for
    their removal, including your assessment of their character and
    leadership?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable. If confirmed, my focus will be on
    assisting the Secretary of the Air Force with their Title 10
    responsibility to organize, train, and equip the Department of the Air
    Force.

        90. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you think a servicemember
    or officer should do if they discover wrongdoing or are asked to follow
    orders that they believe to be illegal or in violation of the
    Constitution?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Our oath is to support and defend the Constitution
    and only follow lawful orders. I have a long record of doing just that.
    If confirmed, I commit to continuing that record and will encourage all
    in the Department of the Air Force to do so.

        91. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what should the criteria be for
    reducing the rank of base commanders?
        Mr. Lohmeier. In general, I believe all commanders should be held
    accountable and I believe the Nation expects accountability throughout
    the Department. Adverse administrative actions are already captured
    under governing regulations, and I have no reason to believe they are
    not already sufficient. If confirmed, I commit to upholding the core
    values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence in All
    We Do.

        92. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what steps will you take to make
    clear that officers should report orders that they believe are illegal?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Alongside the Secretary, if confirmed, I commit that
    consistent communication on the importance of adhering to the law will
    be a hallmark of my tenure.
                     january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol
        93. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on August 9, 2024, in a tweet you
    referred to January 6 as ``a gov't led false flag and hoax at the
    Capitol.'' Do you still agree with this statement? If not, why did you
    make it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I authored this as a private citizen freely
    expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. It does not reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        94. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that January 6th
    was a false flag operation and on what basis?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My statements in the past on this topic were authored
    as a private citizen freely expressing my Constitutional right to free
    speech. They do not reflect how I would express myself as a leader of
    the Department of the Air Force and a representative of that
    institution, if confirmed.

        95. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, why do you believe that there
    were ``undercover government agents at the Capitol on January 6?''
        Mr. Lohmeier. I read it in a report by the Department of Justice
    (DOJ) Inspector General, released on December 11, 2024, which
    specifically addresses the FBI's handling of confidential human sources
    (CHSs) on January 6. The report confirms that there were 26 FBI CHSs in
    Washington, DC, that day. Three of those informants had specific tasks
    from the FBI. Twenty-three others attended on their own initiative, 3
    of whom entered the Capitol and 11 of whom entered restricted areas.

        96. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on the evening prior to President
    Biden's inauguration, you watched a Tucker Carlson Tonight episode
    focused on the aftermath of January 6th and stated that, ``The
    progressive Left's appalling invective had reached an unbelievably low,
    mean, and accusatory State. I recognized that kind of speech. It was
    the ideologically possessed rhetoric of genocide.'' Do you still stand
    by that statement and if so, why?
        Mr. Lohmeier. This statement must be understood in the context of
    the entire book from which it was extracted and not in isolation. The
    warning of the last chapter of my book Irresistible Revolution is that
    the country is dangerously polarized, and that a country ``cannot
    persist in the hate-filled demonization of entire groups of people
    based on their race or political affiliation'' without it leading
    eventually to violence. My message in the book was an invitation for
    our servicemembers to ``avoid the anger of partisan politics'' and to
    avoid the demonization of entire groups of people based on their race
    or political affiliation. I invited uniformed servicemembers to not
    participate in this divisive rhetoric and to ``never use your position
    of authority to unduly propound partisan political views. To do so is
    to undermine good order and discipline.'' (reference chapter 7 of the
    book in question)
                             criticisms of the left
        97. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you agree that it is essential
    for the military to remain an apolitical institution? If confirmed, do
    you commit to ensuring that the military remains apolitical?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, this is a topic I am passionate about. If
    confirmed, I commit to ensuring the military remains an apolitical
    institution.

        98. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, is it appropriate to punish,
    promote, demote, or take other personnel actions against military
    personnel for their political views? If you think it is, under what
    circumstances?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Servicemembers are required to abide by guidance
    found in DOD Directives governing political activities for members of
    the armed forces. Violations of those directives should be
    appropriately addressed. If confirmed, I will continue to advocate that
    servicemembers abide by these governing DOD regulations.

        99. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on January 12, 2024, you stated
    that ``I believe Democrats' obsession with uniformity--and love affair
    with DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion]--is the result of a
    possession of the Communist spirit.'' Do you still agree with this
    statement? If not, why did you make it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
    statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
    Constitutional right to free speech. As a private citizen, I have often
    criticized and or warned that the military was losing its focus on
    lethality. However, these statements do not reflect how I would express
    myself as a leader of the Department of the Air Force and a
    representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        100. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on December 24, 2023, you stated
    that ``Democrats still lynch those who fight against DEI initiatives.
    They only go as far as is socially permissible, but they are possessed
    of the same spirit they've always been.'' What do you mean by this
    statement and do you still agree with it? If you no longer agree with
    it, why did you make it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not recall ever having made this statement. I
    have searched but cannot find any online content suggesting I've ever
    made this statement. Statements like this do not reflect how I would
    express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air Force and a
    representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        101. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on April 1, 2023, you stated
    that, ``Of all that is good and decent the Left is the real
    oppressor.'' Do you still agree with this statement? If not, why did
    you make it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I can find no evidence that I ever made such a
    statement. If I did, I made it as a private citizen freely expressing
    my Constitutional right to free speech. These statements do not reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed..

        102. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on March 30, 2023, you stated
    that, ``The left is always pointing fingers at conservatives for
    inciting violence, but they are the ones guilty of it. It's always
    someone else's fault. The left is sick.'' Do you still agree with this
    statement? If not, why did you make it?
        Mr. Lohmeier. If I made this statement, I made it as a private
    citizen freely expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. These
    statements do not reflect how I would express myself as a leader of the
    Department of the Air Force and a representative of that institution,
    if confirmed.

        103. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, you wrote in reference to a
    Tucker Carlson Tonight episode that, ``Again, the reason his remarks
    are relevant is because they reveal the rhetorical demonization of
    conservatives and whites in the country. It is specifically the kind of
    rhetoric necessary to justify violence against people.'' You also wrote
    that, ``To be perfectly clear, the path we are on as a country leads to
    fratricidal and genocidal warfare.'' Do you stand by these statements
    and do you believe that our country is on the path to fratricidal and
    genocidal warfare?
        Mr. Lohmeier. These statements must be understood in the context of
    the entire book from which they were extracted and not in isolation.
    The warning of the last chapter of my book Irresistible Revolution is
    that the country is dangerously polarized, and that a country ``cannot
    persist in the hate-filled demonization of entire groups of people
    based on their race or political affiliation'' without it leading
    eventually to violence. My message in the book was an invitation for
    our servicemembers to ``avoid the anger of partisan politics'' and to
    avoid the demonization of entire groups of people based on their race
    or political affiliation.

        104. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe any of the above
    statements reflect servicemembers who consider themselves to be
    Democrats or on the Left? If so, which statements do you consider
    accurate regarding servicemembers?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The statements I have made that are partisan in
    nature have been made as a private citizen in this country. I always
    honored and acted true to my obligation to remain apolitical while
    wearing the uniform of the country. Our uniformed servicemembers are
    entitled to their own private political views, but their expression of
    those views and their conduct are strictly governed by law and DOD
    regulations. Our men and women in uniform set aside their political
    differences to focus on what unites them in accomplishing a mission in
    defense of our country.

        105. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think it is appropriate
    for a leader to disparage those they lead as having ``a possession of
    the Communist spirit'' or ``the real oppressor,'' or lynch[ing] those
    who fight against DEI initiatives,'' or ``sick''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My record shows an unblemished career of working with
    airmen and guardians from all walks of life. I have had members under
    my command who did not know my political views, nor I theirs. I believe
    that is as it should be. I have never disparaged those I have led.
    Unity is our strength, and I firmly believe my record reflects a
    leadership style focused on that unity--not division. If confirmed, I
    will continue to lead that way in the Department of the Air Force.
                             lgbtq+ servicemembers
        106. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on August 26, 2024, you stated,
    ``Wow-Military families are facing terrible decisions about whether to
    continue serving or to pull their kids out of the DOD education
    environment to save their children from gender-fluid/queer/trans
    cults.'' Do you stand by this statement? Please explain what you mean
    by ``gender-fluid/queer/trans cults.''
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
    statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
    Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        107. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on May 23, 2024, you stated
    that, ``Military leaders cannot pretend to care about solving the
    problem of sexual assaults in the military while also propagating
    mental illness and celebrating sexual deviance.'' Do you stand by this
    statement? Please explain what you mean by ``mental illness'' and
    ``sexual deviance.''
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
    statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
    Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        108. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on May 15, 2024, you stated that
    a May 13, 2024, memorandum ``admonishes servicemembers to celebrate and
    honor the lifestyle and contributions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals,
    transgenders and queers . . . The memorandum `empowers commanders' to
    `organize' activities for their bases. It is a revolutionary campaign
    that no longer needs to hide its aims. It employs all of the right
    revolutionary language. It is Marxist-rooted DEI at its best. It is
    evil. If you are in uniform, now is the time for you to speak up
    against this as if the life of your country depends on it, because it
    does . . . Feigned kindness in the face of evil is only foolishness.
    Tolerance of this revolutionary spirit at this critical hour is little
    short of treasonous. Cowardice is the opposite of faith and love.'' Do
    you stand by these statements?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
    statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
    Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        109. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that members of
    the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families, are
    ``evil''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.

        110. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that members of
    the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families, are
    ``treasonous''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.

        111. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that those who
    support the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their
    families, are ``evil''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.

        112. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that those who
    support LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families,
    are ``treasonous''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.

        113. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on July 1, 2023, you stated that
    a transgender servicemember was ``weak, mentally and physically, and
    needs a different environment to work out [her] problems.'' Do you
    believe that transgender people are mentally and physically weak?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I did not make such a generalization.

        114. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, in response to a tweet from
    another user who posted about an openly transgender female fighter, you
    tweeted, ``A mental health epidemic celebrated by the left and forced
    into the rest.'' Do you stand by this statement, and do you believe
    that being transgender means someone is part of a ``mental health
    epidemic''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
    statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
    Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
    how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
    Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.

        115. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, how do you think Department of
    Defense leaders making statements like the above hurts recruitment and
    morale for servicemembers with LGBTQ+ children?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have access to the data that would assist in
    making a determination as to whether such statements are having a
    negative effect on recruiting or morale.

        116. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did you ever support ``Don't
    Ask, Don't Tell''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I support the law. If confirmed, I will continue to
    uphold the law.

        117. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you currently support ``Don't
    Ask, Don't Tell''?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I support the law. If confirmed, I will continue to
    uphold the law.

        118. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that LGBTQ+
    servicemembers should be able to openly serve in our military?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I support the Department's policy of allowing all to
    serve as long as they can meet the standards without accommodation.

        119. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you expect to meet recruiting
    goals and attract the most effective future leaders if you continue to
    insult and denigrate servicemembers who are part of the LGBTQ+
    community?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I reject the premise of this question. I do not
    desire to insult or denigrate any servicemembers.
                                 investigations
        120. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did you receive permission from
    any component of the Department of Defense to publish your book,
    Irresistible Revolution: Marxism's Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of
    the American Military?
        Mr. Lohmeier. No. However, I consulted with and received legal
    counsel from my base judge advocate general and consulted with and
    received advice from DOD public affairs before publication. My purpose
    in consulting with them was to understand my legal obligations as well
    as DOD policy and I acted consistent with their advice and counsel.

        121. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, were you advised by public
    affairs personnel or any other individuals that the pre-publication
    review of your book was unnecessary? Please provide a copy of any
    correspondence or documentation that confirms this.
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, I was advised by both my base judge advocate
    general and a DOD public affairs officer that prepublication review was
    unnecessary given the academic/historical nature of the work.
    Unfortunately, I do not have written correspondence or documentation
    confirming this. DOD may still have these files on hand.

        122. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, after you were relieved as the
    commander of the 11th Space Warning Squadron at Buckley Air Force Base
    but were still an Active Duty servicemember, you went on the Sean
    Hannity Show and said that communications were sent out to every base
    to prepare for the Department's ``extremism down-days'' and that these
    communications ``taught that the country was evil. That it was founded
    in 1619 not 1776. And that Whites are inherently evil.'' The Department
    of Defense provided training videos to Fox News that contradicted your
    claims. Do you still stand by these statements?
        Mr. Lohmeier. The interview in question was taken in my personal
    capacity, which was indicated at the beginning of the interview. In the
    interview, I accurately communicated the guidance that servicemembers
    had received from the Department, and I advocated for an apolitical
    military, and said that my standard as a commander was to not tolerate
    any discrimination based on race or political affiliation. However,
    what I said has been mischaracterized in the question above. I stand by
    the comments I made during that interview in their full context, but
    those comments were made in reference to what was being taught and
    discussed at my base specifically. The partisan and anti-American
    rhetoric at my base were the subject of a formal written complaint to
    the Space Force IG in November 2020, over a half-year before my book
    was published.

        123. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did the Air Force Inspector
    General launch an investigation about your conduct relating to the
    complaint made to the Air Force Inspector General dated May 14, 2021?
        Mr. Lohmeier. To the best of my knowledge, the Air Force Inspector
    General did launch an investigation into my conduct; however, I am not
    aware of ``the complaint'' referenced.

        124. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did the Air Force Inspector
    General complete any investigation on your conduct?
        Mr. Lohmeier. My present understanding is that completion of the
    investigation was deemed unnecessary due to my voluntary separation
    from the Service. However, shortly after I separated, I was informed by
    phone that the investigation had been ``closed,'' and that neither I
    nor then-Lt Gen Stephen Whiting had been found guilty of misconduct.

        125. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the Air Force Inspector
    General completed any investigation regarding your conduct, please
    provide the results of this investigation.
        Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have anything in writing indicating the
    results of that investigation. After I honorably separated from Active
    Duty in September 2021, I received a phone call from the Air Force IG
    office who informed me that the investigation had closed, and that
    neither I nor then-Lt Gen Stephen Whiting had been found guilty of
    misconduct.

        126. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please provide a copy of the
    results of the Command Directed Investigation (CDI) initiated by
    Lieutenant General Stephen Whiting, USSF, to determine whether public
    comments you had made constituted prohibited partisan political
    activity.
        Mr. Lohmeier. While [DC5]Lt Gen Whiting did inform me that he had
    directed an investigation, I was never provided with the results and
    presume this means that the allegations were appropriately
    unsubstantiated.
                             nuclear modernization
        127. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the Air Force plans to extend
    Minuteman III to 2050, would the Air Force and lead contractor Northrop
    Grumman Corp. benefit from additional time to better plan and manage
    the Sentinel program?
        Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding the Minuteman III will
    continue to be sustained and operated by the Air Force until replaced
    by Sentinel. The capabilities and deterrence value of Sentinel
    capabilities are critical to national defense. If confirmed, I will
    commit to working with the acquisition enterprise and industry to
    successfully manage the Sentinel program.

        128. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
    the value of an Integrated Master Schedule for managing large and
    complex programs?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand the value of an Integrated Master
    Schedule (IMS) to be critical to verifying the attainability of
    contract objectives, evaluating progress toward meeting program
    objectives and integrating government/contractor program schedule
    activities. I believe this type of comprehensive roadmap can help
    improve communication, coordination, and control throughout a program's
    life.

        129. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, under what circumstances should
    a complex program advance without an Integrated Master Schedule?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that advancing a complex program without
    an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) is generally a higher-risk
    proposition and should be avoided whenever possible.

        130. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
    the biggest challenges confronting the Sentinel program?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I understand there to be a variety of challenges
    confronting the Sentinel programs, including talent acquisition, supply
    chain deliveries, and construction complexity, to name a few. I know
    that overcoming these challenges will require strong leadership,
    effective management, and sustained commitment from the government,
    industry, and the public. If confirmed, I look forward to getting fully
    briefed on this program and helping to find solutions to the
    challenges.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Duckworth
                         politicization of the military
        131. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, you stated in your hearing
    testimony that you engaged with Members of Congress about your
    concerns, after your Inspector General (IG) complaint was found with no
    merit but before you decided to publish your book and publicly speak
    out. You committed to providing documentation of your correspondence
    with Members of Congress. Can you please provide records of this
    correspondence with dates?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, as I stated in my hearing testimony, I attempted
    to engage Members of Congress by letter about my concerns over the
    politicization of the military workplace after I had discussed my
    concerns with my chain of command and after my IG complaint had been
    dismissed. I have attached that letter, dated May 14, 2021. The same
    letter was addressed and sent to various members of both the Senate and
    House of Representatives.

        132. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you commit
    not to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers
    for executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I commit to following the law.
                        inspector general investigation
        133. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, as you promised in our call
    on April 30, 2025, can you please provide documentation of your claim
    that, after you separated, the Air Force cleared you of any accusations
    or formal charges of engaging in prohibited partisan political activity
    or partisan statements?
        Mr. Lohmeier. I honorably separated from Active Duty on September
    1, 2021. The honorable discharge status is indicated on my DD214. After
    I separated from the Air Force, the Air Force IG office called to
    inform me that they had closed their investigation, and the evidence
    did not substantiate any allegations against me. I never received any
    written notification afterward, but the Air Force may have additional
    documentation.
                            unauthorized disclosures
        134. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you commit
    that your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
    official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
    both oversight and institutional memory?
        Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier, which
    was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Matthew L.
    Lohmeier in connection with his nomination follows:]

       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the committee's executive files.]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier was reported to
    the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on July 24, 2025.]
                                     ______

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh by
    Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                   duties, qualifications, and relationships
        Question. Section 137a of title 10, U.S. Code, establishes the
    position of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and
    Security (DUSD(I&S)) and provides that the DUSD ``shall be appointed
    from among persons who have extensive experience in intelligence
    matters.''
        If confirmed as DUSD(I&S), what do you believe would be your most
    critical duties and responsibilities?
        Answer. The primary responsibility of the Deputy Under Secretary of
    Defense for Intelligence and Security (DUSD(I&S)) is to support the
    Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) as
    well as the Secretary of Defense by executing his intelligence and
    security responsibilities and authorities, including the authorities
    that are codified in Title 10 and Title 50 of the United States Code.
    Conducting this responsibility in support of the warfighter and our
    national defense will always be on the top of my mind. If confirmed, I
    will also always want to balance the USD(I&S)'s responsibilities with
    the protection of privacy and civil liberties, pursuant to section
    137(c) of Title 10 United States Code and in accordance with Federal
    law and the regulations and directives of the Department of Defense.
        I understand that the responsibilities of the DUSD(I&S) by statute
    and policy are contained in DOD Directive 5143.01. I would support the
    USD(I&S) as the Principal Staff Assistant and advisor regarding
    intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities, and
    other intelligence-related matters; exercising authority, direction,
    and control on behalf of the Secretary of Defense over the Defense
    Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
    (NGA), the National Security Agency / Central Security Service (NSA /
    CSS), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the Defense
    Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA); establishing policy and
    priorities for, and providing oversight of, the defense intelligence
    and security enterprises; exercising oversight of personnel policy to
    ensure that intelligence organizations in the Department of Defense are
    staffed, organized, trained, and equipped to support the missions of
    the Department; ensuring that the DOD intelligence components that are
    also elements of the intelligence community (IC) are responsive to the
    Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the execution of the DNI's
    authorities; ensuring that the combatant commanders, the Joint Chiefs
    of Staff, and the civilian leadership of the Department are provided
    with appropriate intelligence support; ensuring that
    counterintelligence activities in the Department are conducted and
    managed efficiently and effectively; ensuring that certain sensitive
    activities which the Department conducts or supports are conducted and
    managed efficiently and effectively; overseeing the implementation of
    assigned DOD security policies and programs to ensure efficiency and
    effectiveness; and serving as the Program Executive for the Military
    Intelligence Program (MIP).
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DUSD(I&S)
    as ``first assistant'' to the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S))?
        Answer. As the principal assistant to the Under Secretary, the
    DUSD(I&S) assists the USD(I&S) in carrying out the responsibilities,
    fulfill functions, manage relationships, and exercise authorities as
    provided for in law and DOD Directive 5143.01, including the exercise
    of authority, direction, and control on behalf of the Secretary of
    Defense over the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National
    Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National Security Agency/
    Central Security Service (NSA/CSS), the National Reconnaissance Office
    (NRO), and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA).
    In addition, the DUSD(I&S) assists the USD(I&S) in planning, policy,
    and strategic oversight for all defense intelligence,
    counterintelligence and security policy, plans, and programs. Last, the
    DUSD(I&S) advises on and assists the Under Secretary with all
    responsibilities in providing staff advice and assistance to the
    Secretary of Defense. If confirmed, as a leader in the Department it is
    an implied responsibility, when appropriate, beneficial, and lawful, to
    collaboratively support the intelligence-related needs for the whole-
    of-government mission to protect our Nation's security.
        Question. What is your understanding of the differences between the
    title 10 and title 50 duties of the USD(I&S)--duties that, in regard to
    some matters, could be delegated to you if confirmed as the DUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. My understanding is that the DUSD(I&S) supports the
    USD(I&S) and Secretary of Defense in fulfilling all the Secretary's
    statutory responsibilities in the areas of intelligence and security,
    whether codified in Title 10 or Title 50 of the United States Code.
    Although I am not aware of any specific portfolio assignments or
    delegations at this time, the duties of the USD(I&S) are further
    prescribed in DOD Directive (DoDD) 5143.01. This includes providing
    overall direction and supervision for policy, program planning and
    execution, and use of resources for DOD activities that are part of the
    Military Intelligence Program and for personnel security, physical
    security, industrial security, and the protection of classified
    information and controlled unclassified information-related activities.
    Of note, section 137(c) of title 10 also states that it shall be a top
    priority of the USD(I&S) to protect privacy and civil liberties in
    accordance with Federal law and the regulations and directives of DOD.
        I also understand that the USD(I&S) supports the Secretary of
    Defense in fulfilling the responsibilities in subsection 3038(a) of
    Title 50, United States Code, in consultation with the Director of
    National Intelligence, to ensure: (1) that the budgets of the
    intelligence community (IC) elements within the Department of Defense
    (DoD) are adequately funded to the overall DOD intelligence needs; (2)
    the implementation of the policies and resource decisions of the
    Director of National Intelligence by DOD Components within the National
    Intelligence Program (NIP); (3) that DOD tactical intelligence
    activities complement and are compatible with intelligence activities
    funded by the NIP; (4) that the IC elements within DOD are responsive
    and timely with respect to satisfying the needs of operational military
    forces; (5) waste and unnecessary duplication among the DOD
    intelligence activities are eliminated; and (6) that DOD intelligence
    activities are conducted jointly where appropriate.
        Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
    that you would apply to your service as DUSD(I&S), if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, it would be my privilege to put my nearly 26
    years of experience in leadership and management in service as
    DUSD(I&S). Most recently, I've served as the Chief Operations Officer
    for Strategic Decision Solutions, a boutique strategy and risk
    consulting firm serving midsize ($200mil to $1b) property and casualty
    insurance companies. Prior to that, I served in the U.S. Army for over
    25 years, retiring as a Colonel. I've successfully led and managed
    organizations specializing in Infantry, Intelligence
    Counterintelligence and Recruiting operations. As part of my duties,
    I've managed relationships with U.S. community leaders, U.S. and
    foreign intelligence services, and U.S. interagency and foreign
    military partners.
        Question. Please provide an example of a situation in which you led
    and brought to conclusion a management improvement/change initiative in
    a complex organization.
        Answer. As Director of Intelligence for a Special Operations--Joint
    Task Force at U.S. Special Operations Command, I led a change
    initiative to establish full-spectrum intelligence support for a new
    strategic organization tasked with global synchronization of sensitive,
    national-level capabilities. As part of this effort, I successfully
    convened seven international partners to collaborate on 148 global
    operations, enhancing partner-nation interoperability and improving the
    efficiency and efficacy of operations and intelligence sharing.
    Additionally, I built a new decision support and analytical team that
    connected our joint task force with 25 national defense, intelligence,
    and academic organizations. This initiative culminated in the creation
    of a comprehensive, global threat picture, which significantly
    strengthened our ability to respond to emerging threats and made a
    measurable impact on global security operations.
        Question. What is your experience across the domain of intelligence
    matters? Security matters?
        Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to applying my over two
    decades of intelligence and security related experience to the role of
    DUSD(I&S). Mostly recently, I served as Director of Intelligence for a
    Special Operations--Joint Task Force, establishing full-spectrum
    intelligence support to a new U.S. Special Operations Command
    organization charged with global synchronization of sensitive,
    national-level capabilities. In this capacity I worked across the
    Intelligence Community and Interagency along with Foreign Allies and
    Partners to reorient some of the U.S.'s most exceptional resources
    toward our most challenging threats. Prior to that role, I served in
    various intelligence positions of increasing responsibility including
    Human Intelligence Branch Chief at U.S. Special Operations Command, the
    Commander of all U.S. Army Strategic Counterintelligence operations in
    Europe and Africa, Counterintelligence Case Officer, Executive Officer
    for the U.S. Army's only dedicated Counterintelligence unit charged
    with supporting Special Operations Forces, Military Source Operations
    Collector in eastern Afghanistan, the Senior Intelligence Officer for
    2d Battalion, 1st Special Forces Group, and as a Reconnaissance Platoon
    Leader in the 101st Airborne Division. Along the way, I earned two
    graduate degrees (MS in Defense Analysis and MA in National Security
    and Strategic Studies), co-authored scholarly articles on intelligence
    and foreign policy, graduated from DIA's Advanced Foreign
    Counterintelligence Operations Course, earned the U.S. Army
    Counterintelligence Agent's Badge and Credentials and was recognized
    with the National Counterintelligence Executive's 2014
    Counterintelligence Operations Award.
        Question. Are there are any actions you would take to enhance your
    ability to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the DUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. If confirmed, leveraging the experience and wisdom of the
    career professionals within the DISE and throughout the Department will
    be critical to my own and the organization's success. I believe in the
    value of seeking knowledge in every direction and will do so if
    confirmed. Furthermore, I would work to ensure an organization climate
    that encourages the best ideas to flow freely through the organization.
        From my understanding of the responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) and
    requirements in support of DOD, the broader IC, and the whole-of-
    government, it is imperative to foster and facilitate a collaborative
    environment to achieve mission success. If confirmed, I will personally
    work to maintain strong relationships and seek new opportunities for
    collaboration with stakeholders.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that your tenure as DUSD(I&S) epitomizes the fundamental requirement
    for civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the U.S.
    Constitution and other laws?
        Answer. As a proud Veteran, I am fully committed to upholding the
    fundamental requirement in the U.S. Constitution and other laws for
    civilian control of the Armed Forces, a key principle of American
    governance and enabler for our success as a Nation. This includes
    executing my responsibilities and duties established by law and policy
    to the President, Secretary of Defense, and to the U.S. Congress, and
    holding those who I manage and oversee accountable for the same.
        Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
    responsibilities between the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)) and the Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)?
        Answer. The partnership between OUSD(I&S) and Office of the
    Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) is essential to the success of
    the DISE. The OUSD(I&S) works closely with the ODNI to effectively
    integrate intelligence in support of U.S. national security interests.
    Through the effective partnership and integration between OUSD(I&S) and
    ODNI, the Intelligence Community delivers coordinated intelligence to
    policymakers and warfighters on crucial threats to our national
    security. If confirmed, I will seek to continue to strengthen the
    partnership between OUSD(I&S) and the ODNI to maximize effects and
    return on investment of our combined efforts.
        The USD(I&S) himself is dual-hatted as the Director of Defense
    Intelligence at ODNI and there is a military officer who serves as the
    DNI's Advisor on Military Affairs (DAMA) to ensure tight coordination
    between the Department of Defense Intelligence Enterprise (DIE) and the
    greater IC. The staffs must coordinate to effectively and efficiently
    ensure quality intelligence is provided in support of our national
    leadership and warfighters. I believe that USD(I&S) plays a critical
    role and is effective in ensuring IC support to Warfighters.
        Last, as a principal member of the Suitability and Security
    Clearance Performance Accountability Council (PAC), the USD(I&S) works
    with the DNI, who is the Security Executive Agent and a principal
    member of the PAC.
        Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
    responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the Office of the Under
    Secretary of Defense for Policy (OUSD(P)), particularly as regards
    policy and programs for information operations, including military
    deception and operations security (OPSEC)?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Policy (USD(P)) is the Principal Staff Assistant for oversight of
    Information Operations (IO), and that the USD(I&S) is the Program
    Management Lead for DOD deception activities and operations security.
    In coordination with the USD(P), the USD(I&S) develops and oversees
    implementation of DOD policy, programs, and guidance for military
    deception and operations security; the coordination and deconfliction
    of DOD IO and intelligence activities; and develops and oversees the
    implementation of policy for intelligence support to IO. If confirmed,
    I will prioritize ensuring the Department has all available tools to
    effectively compete along the full competition continuum. A strong
    partnership between OUSD(I&S) and OUSD(P) is critical in the
    development and effectiveness of DOD activities to counter adversary
    activities in the ``gray zone'', which will enable our ability to deter
    adversaries short of armed conflict and re-establish deterrence.
        Question. In your view, what would be the optimum relationship
    between the OUSD(I&S) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in
    regard to providing operational intelligence, counterintelligence, and
    security support to the warfighter?
        Answer. I understand that the USD(I&S) is responsible for
    supporting the Secretary of Defense in discharging his intelligence and
    security responsibilities and authorities under Title 10 and Title 50
    of the United States Code. This includes exercising authority,
    direction, and control on behalf of the Secretary of Defense over
    certain defense intelligence components of the Department of Defense
    and working closely with the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, Service
    Components, and the ODNI to develop effective policy, plans, programs,
    and priorities. The optimal relationship between OUSD(I&S) and the
    Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is mutual support and
    consultation to ensure the defense intelligence enterprise (DIE)
    provides the warfighters with the best intelligence possible, to
    conduct their planning and operations and to provide the Secretary of
    Defense with the best defense intelligence and military advice.
        Question. What is your understanding of how the responsibilities
    for the oversight of the activities and programs of special operations
    forces are delineated between the OUSD(I&S) and the Assistant Secretary
    of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict
    (ASD(SOLIC))?
        Answer. I understand that USD(I&S), the Assistant Secretary of
    Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/
    LIC)), and the DOD Senior Intelligence Oversight Official (SIOO) acting
    together are the primary oversight officials for all U.S. Special
    Operations Forces intelligence and intelligence-related activities and
    programs. A strong partnership between OUSD(I&S), ASD(SO/LIC), and
    their Deputies is critical in the development and effectiveness of many
    DOD activities in the ``gray zone,'' which will enable DOD's ability to
    deter adversaries short of armed conflict and reestablish deterrence.
    If confirmed, we will work closely together with the SIOO, who I
    understand provides independent oversight within the Department of
    intelligence and intelligence-related activities. I will continue this
    close partnership to ensure that the United States is best postured to
    maximize effects. In doing so, I will ensure defense intelligence
    activities adhere to appropriate coordination processes within the
    Office of the Secretary of Defense.
        Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
    responsibilities between OUSD(I&S) and the Office of the Under
    Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment (OUSD(A&S)) in
    regard to both unclassified and classified contract efforts?
        Answer. I understand the relationship between OUSD(I&S) and the
    Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment
    (OUSD(A&S)) is one of cooperation and collaboration. I am aware of
    existing important efforts between both offices, to include an
    examination of DOD oversight of classified contracting, getting the
    National Background Investigation Services program back on track, and
    partnering to protect the National Security Innovation Base and Defense
    Industrial Base from adversary compromise. If confirmed, I look forward
    to learning more about these efforts and making my own assessment of
    their progress.
        Also, if confirmed, a priority of mine will be to better enable
    intelligence to inform Department investments, effectively matching
    capabilities with threats, along the entire acquisition life cycle. I
    will work closely with the USD(A&S) to best integrate intelligence
    efforts to effectively support decisionmakers amidst a rapidly evolving
    technological and threat environment.
        Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
    responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the DOD Chief Information
    Officer, particularly with respect to the cybersecurity mission;
    developing interoperability requirements applicable to information
    systems architectures for processing intelligence and
    counterintelligence information; and the certification of intelligence
    information systems?
        Answer. I view the relationship between the OUSD(I&S) and the
    Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DoD CIO) as one
    predicated on collaboration and partnership to align, secure, and
    modernize information security policies and DOD's information system
    architectures to support our warfighters. I understand that the DOD CIO
    advises the Secretary of Defense on information technology, including
    National Security Systems and defense business systems, cybersecurity,
    and develops DOD strategy and policy for all DOD information
    technology. Along with the newly established position for the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the partnership between
    OUSD(I&S) and DOD CIO is imperative for continuing cybersecurity
    efforts, such as implementing Zero Trust on all three DOD network
    fabrics to mitigate nefarious actors including potential insider
    threats.
        If confirmed, I will work with the DOD CIO to advance the
    department's mission by ensuring an integrated, intelligence, and
    counterintelligence informed management of IT and network security that
    addresses the evolving cybersecurity threat.
        Question. How do you view the relationship between the OUSD(I&S)
    and the heads of the Intelligence Components of the Military
    Departments? What factors would you recommend that the USD(I&S)
    consider and weigh in providing input to the Secretaries of the
    Military Departments on the duty performance of the heads of their
    respective Intelligence Components?
        Answer. My understanding is that the OUSD(I&S) staff works closely
    with the heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence components
    of the Military Departments. The USD(I&S) then provides input to the
    Secretaries of the Military Departments on the performance of the
    senior intelligence officer within each Military Department.
        The USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant to the Secretary of
    Defense with authority delegated from the Secretary to establish policy
    for DOD intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive
    activities, and other intelligence-related matters. If confirmed as the
    DUSD(I&S), I will assist the Directors for Defense Intelligence within
    OUSD(I&S) with their specific programmatic responsibilities and support
    the USD(I&S) in carrying out his assigned responsibilities and
    exercising the authorities delegated to the USD(I&S) by the Secretary
    of Defense.
        The Secretaries of the Military Departments exercise authority,
    direction, and control over all components within their respective
    Departments. The heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence
    components within the Military Departments are under the authority,
    direction, and control of the Secretary of the Military Department, and
    subject to the policy oversight of the USD(I&S).
        I understand that DOD Directive 5143.01 outlines the
    responsibilities and functions, relationships, and authorities of the
    USD(I&S). In accordance with this Directive, OUSD(I&S) assists the
    USD(I&S) to develop and provide policy guidance, resource advocacy, and
    oversight for the integration of Reserve Component intelligence
    elements, and ensures the Department effectively employs and resources
    Reserve Component intelligence elements to best support the National
    Defense Strategy. The programmatic role of OUSD(I&S) is the same with
    respect to the Active and Reserve Components of the Military Services.
    Like the Active Components, the Reserve Components' intelligence
    elements are under the authority, direction, and control of the
    Secretary of the relevant Military Department in which they are
    located, and subject to the policy oversight of the OUSD(I&S).
        Question. What is your understanding of the DUSD(I&S)'s
    responsibility and authority for the management and oversight of
    Military Intelligence Program (MIP) and National Intelligence Program
    (NIP) funding? How do the processes employed by the OUSD(I&S) in the
    execution of these responsibilities differ from the Planning,
    Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process applicable to all
    other DOD organizations and funding?
        Answer. My understanding is that USD(I&S) executes the Secretary's
    statutory responsibilities regarding the budgets of the DOD components
    that comprise the Intelligence Community (IC), specifically ensuring
    the budgets of DOD IC elements are adequate to satisfy the overall
    intelligence needs of the Department. Further, as the MIP Executive
    Agent, the USD(I&S) is also responsible for the management and
    oversight of the Military Intelligence Program (MIP). The USD(I&S)
    executes the functions for the NIP of the Department, as delegated by
    the Secretary of Defense, and as the Director of Defense Intelligence
    for ODNI, has visibility into the NIP through participation in the ODNI
    PPBE decision forums. Additionally, the DNI and the USD(I&S) then
    jointly issue intelligence programming guidance to closely synchronize
    NIP and MIP-funded programs to ensure the Department's priorities are
    communicated to the IC. If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) in
    his partnership with the ODNI in ensuring DOD intelligence requirements
    are effectively supported within the NIP budget.
        With respect to the DOD PPBE process, it is my understanding that
    the USD(I&S) is a full participant in the Department's PPBE process and
    that military intelligence requirements compete with the other DOD
    requirements.
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what actions would you take to
    develop and sustain an open, transparent, and productive relationship
    between the Senate Armed Services Committee and the OUSD(I&S) and the
    Defense Agencies under the authority, direction, and control of the
    USD(I&S)?
        Answer. I believe that collaborative congressional oversight
    provides an invaluable perspective on DOD activities that informs
    better decisions within both branches of government, ultimately making
    DOD more effective in achieving our common purpose of strengthening our
    national defense. If confirmed, I intend to maintain a routine,
    continuous, and transparent dialog with the defense oversight
    committees to discuss the Department's activities that are subject to
    their oversight, including defense intelligence, counterintelligence,
    security, sensitive activities, and other intelligence-related
    activities. I am committed to maintaining open lines of communication
    with Congress to ensure accurate and consistent information is shared
    from the OUSD(I&S) and the defense agencies under USD(I&S) authority.
    Through this approach, I will seek to facilitate effective oversight
    and build mutual trust between DOD and Congress, enabling DOD
    constructive conversations and collaboration on statutory authorities,
    resource allocation, and oversight.
        Question. If confirmed, will you commit to ensure that this
    Committee is provided with the notifications required under law, and
    that any such notification is accurate, complete, and timely?
        Answer. I am committed to keeping Congress fully and currently
    informed for all activities that fall under the USD(I&S)'s
    responsibility under DOD Directive 5143.01, including fulfilling the
    notification requirements in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2723. If
    confirmed, I will examine how the OUSD(I&S) supports the USD(I&S) with
    respect to this responsibility and pursue improvements, as needed, to
    ensure such notifications are accurate, complete, and timely.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
    prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
    or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
    relationships, have a financial interest.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
    potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
    family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
    influencing your decisionmaking?
        Answer. I agree to comply with all conflicts of interest disclosure
    requirements set forth in the Ethics in Government Act and implementing
    regulations.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
    if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
    participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
        Answer. I agree to comply with all recusal requirements under 18
    U.S.C. Sec.  208 and implementing regulations.
        Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    decisionmaking on the merits and exclusively in the public interest,
    without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
        Answer. I commit to deciding matters on the merits based on the
    public interest, without regard to any private gain or personal benefit
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
    challenges you would face if confirmed as the DUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. If confirmed, the most significant challenge I anticipate
    as DUSD(I&S) will be how to ensure that the DISE is most effectively
    supporting the Secretary of Defense's priorities of restoring a warrior
    ethos, rebuilding our military, and reestablishing deterrence in
    support of our national defense in a rapidly changing environment.
        Effective management of the DISE is essential, and we must align
    efforts to maximize effects downrange and the return on our investment.
    This includes ensuring we have the right technology and organizational
    structure to enable our personnel--some of America's best--to increase
    their impact in today's operational environment, and to position the
    Enterprise for the rapidly changing landscape of the future. If
    confirmed, I would ensure the Enterprise has the culture, business best
    practices, and processes necessary to be agile, while remaining laser
    focused on the mission. Adapting the DISE at the speed of relevance
    will be difficult, but essential. From my perspective, technology
    advancements in ubiquitous sensing, space control, and unmanned systems
    at scale are examples of the challenges to which we must adapt.
        If confirmed, I will endeavor to better enable intelligence to
    inform Department investments, effectively matching capabilities with
    threats. With program costs incredibly high--and the cost of
    misallocation on the modern battlefield even higher--the premium on
    intelligence effectively informing the entire acquisition life cycle is
    at an all-time high. I believe the speed of the technology will require
    increased focus earlier in the development cycle, requiring an
    increased focus on scientific & technical intelligence.
        We must ensure the Department has all the tools required to most
    effectively compete along the full continuum of conflict. Our
    adversaries are increasingly conducting malign activity below a
    threshold that has traditionally triggered a military response.
    Enhancing DOD Irregular Warfare capabilities will allow us to provide
    leaders with risk-informed options to better compete short of armed
    conflict and re-establish deterrence. Similarly, I believe offensive
    cyber capabilities and an increased focus on Defense human intelligence
    are areas for opportunity. Finally, offensive counterintelligence
    efforts are essential in disrupting our adversaries. These options may
    often carry additional risk; however, the DISE will strive to provide
    risk-informed options to the Secretary that support his and the
    President's national security objectives.
                      expanding roles and responsibilities
        Question. In 2003, Congress established the position of Under
    Secretary of Defense for Intelligence with the intent to improve
    coordination of the Department of Defense's intelligence and security
    efforts in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11,
    2001. The roles and responsibilities of the Under Secretary have
    expanded significantly since the creation of the position, particularly
    in the areas of security and law enforcement.
        What is your understanding of the evolution and growth of the roles
    and responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) since its establishment?
        Answer. I understand that the evolution of the roles and
    responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) since its establishment in 2003 have
    been strategic and responsive to the evolution and growth of
    requirements to support the Secretary of Defense in executing
    intelligence and security responsibilities and authorities under Title
    10 and Title 50 of the United States Code. The growth is largely
    attributed to the evolution of important security functions and
    programs that enable the Department to more effectively compete across
    the spectrum of conflict, to include implementation and oversight of
    Trusted Workforce 2.0 and the designation of the Under Secretary as the
    Principal Staff Assistant for Law Enforcement. I see these and others
    as necessary to support the Secretary in the successful implementation
    of the Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you intend to balance the
    significant and varied responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. I understand that the USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff
    Assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense with authority
    delegated from the Secretary of Defense to establish policy and provide
    oversight for DOD intelligence, counterintelligence, security,
    sensitive activities, other intelligence-related matters, and law
    enforcement. If confirmed as the DUSD(I&S), I will support the USD(I&S)
    in fulfilling all responsibilities in a manner that supports the
    Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance. I will identify and
    leverage the extraordinary expertise and talent across OUSD(I&S) and
    Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to successfully accomplish
    this objective.
      supervision, and oversight of the defense intelligence and security
                                   enterprise
        Question. The USD(I&S) is vested with responsibility for the
    overall direction and supervision of the Defense Intelligence and
    Security Enterprise in the execution of intelligence,
    counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities, and other
    intelligence-related matters across DOD. Subject to USD(I&S) oversight,
    responsibility for executing policies and programs in these domains
    vests primarily in the Military Departments and Services, elements of
    the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Defense Agencies.
        What is your understanding of the role of the OUSD(I&S) in
    coordinating the activities of the Defense Intelligence and Security
    Enterprise?
        Answer. I see intelligence and security as mutually reinforcing
    mission areas. The Department must understand the intentions,
    capabilities, and activities of strategic competitors and adversaries.
    Similarly, the security apparatus must safeguard our personnel,
    information, capabilities, and infrastructure against adversaries. I
    understand that OUSD(I&S) works across the Department with the Military
    Services and defense agencies to identify requirements and capabilities
    to meet DOD priorities. They work closely with the ODNI to ensure the
    national intelligence priorities take all Departmental requirements
    into account. These efforts ensure Enterprise alignment with all
    national and Department-level strategies, guidance, direction, and
    relevant priorities. The USD(I&S) also executes the Military
    Intelligence Program (MIP) and participates in the ODNI specified
    National Intelligence Program (NIP) process to ensure resources are
    aligned against DOD priorities.
                           national defense strategy
        Question. What is your assessment of the current strategic
    environment, including your assessment of the critical and enduring
    threats to the national security of the United States and its allies
    and partners?
        Answer. The United States faces one of the most dangerous strategic
    environments in our Nation's history, characterized by the
    vulnerability of the U.S. Homeland from years of unsecured borders,
    increasingly capable air and missile threats, and others; China's
    unprecedented military buildup and its intent to seize control of the
    Indo-Pacific; and a range of other persistent threats to the United
    States and its Allies and partners, including Russia, Iran, North
    Korea, and terrorists. In addition, growing cooperation between Russia,
    China, Iran, and North Korea must be monitored to safeguard our
    interests.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize the efforts of the
    Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise relative to the critical
    and enduring threats identified above?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the DISE prioritizes
    intelligence support and effective security posture, aligned to
    strategic priorities and the evolving threat environment. I will work
    across DOD and the Intelligence Community to prioritize capabilities
    that address critical and enduring threats while identifying and
    considering capability gaps and shortfalls throughout the Planning,
    Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process. In addition, I
    will partner closely with the DNI to align the MIP and NIP for greatest
    effect downrange and return on investment.
        Question. In your view, what role(s) should the Defense
    Intelligence and Security Enterprise play in the implementation of the
    National Defense Strategy?
        Answer. The DISE plays a vital role in implementation of an NDS
    promulgated by the Secretary of Defense. In support of the objectives
    of the next NDS, the DISE must support both warfighters and
    decisionmakers; provide decision advantage; reestablish deterrence; and
    safeguard personnel, information, operations, resources, technologies,
    and facilities against a wide range of threats and challenges. At the
    same time, the DISE must also maintain its ability to provide strategic
    warning globally.
        Question. How would you assess the current readiness and
    capabilities of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
    execute the NDS?
        Answer. I believe the DISE is well-postured to support DOD's
    execution of the Department's strategic priorities. If confirmed, I
    will conduct my own assessment of the Enterprise's readiness and seek
    new and innovative ways to improve its ability to execute the Interim
    NDS and the next NDS promulgated by the Secretary of Defense.
              strengthening alliances and attracting new partners
        Question. Mutually beneficial alliances and partnerships are
    crucial to U.S. success in competition and conflict against a great
    power.
        Question. If confirmed as DUSD(I&S), what would be your priorities
    to strengthen and synchronize existing intelligence and
    counterintelligence relationships with foreign governments and
    international organizations as well as to foster new relationships?
        Answer. My time in Army intelligence leading collection operations
    and supporting Special Operations Forces taught me the immense value of
    close partnerships with foreign partners. Strong international
    relationships and intelligence sharing during my military service
    resulting in increased mission success and decreased risk to force,
    while shedding light on the fidelity of strategy, formed the foundation
    for my appreciation of their value at the national level. U.S.
    intelligence sharing relationships in many cases provide outstanding
    return on investment as we each leverage our respective placement,
    access, and capabilities while economizing resources. Allies and
    partners can be force multipliers that enable DOD to effectively
    execute the Secretary's next National Defense Strategy if they approach
    the relationship as true partners, willing to contribute as able and
    appropriate, not simply be recipients of our intelligence and
    information. If confirmed, I commit to strengthening defense
    intelligence and counterintelligence relationships with Allies and
    partners, including ensuring we have the intelligence sharing
    relationships needed to execute the next National Security and National
    Defense Strategies. I also commit to working with the USD(P) and ODNI
    to ensure synchronization of existing U.S. partnerships and the
    appropriate prioritization of outreach to new partners.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors should be considered in
    rendering decisions on the disclosure and release of intelligence to
    foreign governments and international organizations, including in
    support of combatant commanders' expressed desire for better
    intelligence and intelligence sharing to counter foreign malign
    activities?
        Answer. I understand that the National Disclosure Policy (NDP) sets
    forth the factors that must be considered prior to the disclosure of
    classified military information, including military intelligence, to
    appropriate foreign partners. I also understand that the USD(I&S) is
    responsible for issuing policy for the sharing of military
    intelligence. If confirmed, I will support the release of military
    intelligence and coordinate with the DNI to enable the release of
    national intelligence to Allies and partners to support combatant
    command requirements in accordance with the NDP when in support of the
    National Security and National Defense Strategies and aligned with
    United States policy.
                       oversight of sensitive activities
        Question. The Department of Defense defines sensitive activities as
    ``operations, actions, activities, or programs that, if compromised,
    could have enduring adverse effects on U.S. foreign policy, DOD
    activities, or military operations or cause significant embarrassment
    to the U.S., its allies, or the DOD.''
        What is your understanding of the role of the USD(I&S) in providing
    oversight of DOD sensitive activities?
        Answer. The USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant and advisor
    to the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense regarding
    intelligence, counterintelligence, law enforcement, security, sensitive
    activities, tradecraft, and other intelligence-related matters. The
    USD(I&S) establishes policy and provides oversight and direction for
    the coordination, assessment, reporting, and conduct of DOD
    intelligence and intelligence-related sensitive activities, the Defense
    Cover Program, special communications, technical collection support to
    intelligence activities, defense sensitive support, and the clandestine
    use of technology.
        If confirmed, I would work closely with relevant defense and
    interagency stakeholders to ensure DOD sensitive activities are
    conducted consistent with law and DOD policy.
        Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
    assessing risks associated with proposed DOD sensitive activities?
        Answer. I believe that if DOD is to provide the Secretary of
    Defense with all necessary options to effectively compete and deter
    adversaries short of armed conflict, DOD must be prepared to take
    greater risks in the conduct of the sensitive activities necessary to
    reestablish deterrence. However, I strongly believe that these risks
    must be informed risks. OUSD(I&S) should play a critical role in
    strengthening the oversight of DOD sensitive activities, providing the
    Secretary and other decisionmakers with a deeper understanding of the
    intelligence, the threat environment, potential impact assessments, and
    other critical information available to DOD's interagency and
    international partners. If confirmed, I will work with the team to look
    at these and other factors and determine the extent to which our
    current risk assessment methodologies are adequate for the current
    environment to provide the most valuable risk informed decisions.
        Question. Do you believe the USD(I&S) has a responsibility to keep
    the congressional defense committees fully and currently informed of
    DOD sensitive activities? If so, how would you seek to fulfill that
    responsibility?
        Answer. Yes, I believe that the USD(I&S) has this responsibility
    under law, policy, and precedent. If confirmed as the Deputy USD(I&S),
    I intend to support the USD(I&S) to maintain a routine, continuous, and
    transparent dialog with the congressional defense committees on all
    Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise activities, to include DOD
    sensitive activities. I believe that collaborative congressional
    oversight provides an invaluable perspective on DOD activities that
    informs better decisions within both branches of government, ultimately
    making DOD more effective in achieving our common purpose of
    strengthening national defense.
        defense department and the intelligence community collaboration
        Question. Since September 11, 2001, collaboration--both analytical
    and operational--between the Department of Defense and the Intelligence
    Community has grown increasingly close. Seamless collaboration is vital
    to effective and rapid responses to non-traditional threats and
    bringing together the strengths of the full spectrum of defense and
    intelligence capabilities can generate more effective solutions to
    complex problems. However, absent effective management and oversight,
    such collaboration risks blurring distinct agency missions,
    authorities, and funding, as well as creating redundant lines of
    effort.
        In your view, are there aspects of the current relationship between
    the Department and the Intelligence Community that should be re-
    examined or modified?
        Answer. I am aware that the OUSD(I&S) works closely with both ODNI
    and the Central Intelligence Agency to ensure that the Intelligence
    Community (IC) is able to deliver both national and military
    intelligence support to policymakers and warfighters. OUSD(I&S) also
    enables the rest of the DOD and the IC to coordinate and deconflict to
    ensure the most effective execution of intelligence and sensitive
    activities. If confirmed, I will seek to strengthen the relationship
    between OUSD(I&S) and the IC so that we can continue to work together
    to enhance IC capabilities and enable DOD operations.
                              economic competition
        Question. Adversarial economic competition is increasingly an issue
    that DOD needs to factor into its planning process as it intersects
    with military and national security challenges. Adversaries like China
    are using economic competition as a gray zone tactic to out-maneuver
    the U.S. by operating in the interstitial spaces between traditional
    agencies ``lanes in the road'' and stove-piped authorities.
    Increasingly, geographic combatant commands are having to consider in
    their planning process and theater security cooperation plans how to
    combat adversarial economic competition techniques.
        How is DOD postured from an intelligence perspective to understand
    and analyze the intersection of economic and national security to
    better prepare DOD to contribute to economic competition?
        Answer. Economic security is national security--the U.S. military
    is only as powerful as the underlying strength of the U.S. industrial
    base. While the President and the Secretary have made clear the
    expectation that the Department aligns its resources to support the
    warfighter, DOD can play a significant role in coordinated operations
    across the economic and military domains to support national security
    objectives. I understand that DOD has pockets of excellence that
    contribute heavily to this mission space, but there is certainly room--
    and a requirement--for increasing depth in relevant areas of expertise
    to ensure DOD is optimally postured to leverage commercial, financial,
    economic, and military tools to reinforce the United States' military
    advantage. This includes an increased focus on China's efforts to gain
    an economic advantage against the United States and its Allies and
    partners as well as how their specific economic tradecraft is affecting
    our competition in order to inform leadership decisions.
        Question. What expertise and capabilities does DOD have to support
    the collection and analytic needs for economic competition?
        Answer. While I have not been fully briefed on current
    capabilities, I am generally aware that the Defense Intelligence
    Enterprise has expertise in several relevant fields, ranging from
    economics and political science to engineering and biosciences. If
    confirmed, I will seek to identify gaps in our expertise and
    capabilities in order to optimize the Enterprise against the economic
    competition problem set.
        Question. How will you prioritize intelligence support for the
    geographic and functional combatant commands, as well as senior
    leadership in the Department, with regards to adversarial economic
    competition needs?
        Answer. Given the complex and multidisciplinary nature of economic
    competition, I believe that it is critical that support provided to the
    combatant commands aligns with the vision and priorities of DOD senior
    leadership. The President and the Secretary have made clear the
    expectation that the Department aligns its resources to support the
    warfighter. We must ensure we have modern structures that appropriately
    align to the threat, using obsolete organizational structures and
    outmoded approaches to address new types of threats will not work. If
    confirmed, I will work to support the USD(I&S) and work with the
    Defense Intelligence Enterprise (DIE), the Intelligence Community, and
    the broader U.S. Government to ensure the DIE's support is
    appropriately distributed with--and aligned between--these key
    customers to maximize effects.
    joint requirements oversight council (jroc) and the joint capabilities
                  integration and development systems (jcids)
        Question. Per section 181 of title 10, U.S. Code, the JROC is
    vested with the responsibility to assess joint military capabilities;
    establish and approve joint performance requirements that ensure
    interoperability between military capabilities; and identify new joint
    military capabilities based on advances in technology and concepts of
    operation. The JCIDS process was established to address overlap and
    duplication in Military Services' programs by providing the information
    the JROC needs to identify the capabilities and associated operational
    performance requirements needed by the joint warfighter.
        What is your understanding of the role of the JROC and JCIDS in
    identifying and establishing joint warfighter capability requirements
    in the domains of military intelligence, counterintelligence, and
    security?
        Answer. I understand that military intelligence,
    counterintelligence, and security requirements generated from DOD
    Components, including the combatant commands, are accounted for among
    the other Joint Capability Areas in the Joint Requirements Oversight
    Council's (JROC) subordinate Functional Capabilities Boards (FCB).
    These FCBs process ``bottom up'' deliberate and urgent requirements and
    provide ``top down'' portfolio reviews that evaluate specific
    enterprise capability areas. The Joint Capabilities Integration and
    Development Systems (JCIDS) process is also informed by a yearly JROC-
    led Capability Gap Assessment that validates and prioritizes Combatant
    Command capability gaps expressed in their Integrated Priority Lists.
        The USD(I&S), as a statutory advisor to the JROC and its
    subordinate boards, provides advice that supports JCIDS throughout all
    stages of requirements generation and validation processes and plays a
    central role in bridging DOD and IC requirements by directly
    facilitating the common gatekeeping function between the Joint JCIDS
    and the Intelligence Community Capability Requirements Process.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the defense
    intelligence enterprise to provide support and insight in the process
    of informing requirements for the broader acquisition system,
    especially related to understanding threat systems and illuminating
    supply chain issues? Are there sufficient people and resources to
    support acquisition intelligence for the Department?
        Answer. I have real concerns about the ability of the existing DOD
    acquisition integration structure with the intelligence enterprise to
    effectively match the speed of the technology cycle, the increasing
    scope of acquisitions challenges, and the criticality of the defense
    supply chain resiliency in the face of adversary threats. The DISE is a
    vital component of the acquisition process, providing intelligence
    throughout the requirements development and acquisition lifecycle on
    current and future adversary capabilities and threats to DOD supply
    chains. Ensuring that intelligence is incorporated throughout the
    requirements development and acquisition lifecycle is necessary to
    deliver effective, affordable, and resilient capabilities that are
    matched to the threat environment and free from adversary compromise.
    If confirmed, I will make it a priority to improve the incorporation of
    accurate intelligence into the full acquisition lifecycle, to include
    more robust integration at the earlier stages of the process, to better
    inform DOD investments.
        Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Office of
    the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security
    (OUSD(I&S)) in identifying and establishing requirements for rapid or
    urgent operational needs, or other acquisition capabilities (like
    middle tier acquisitions) not tied to major acquisition programs?
        Answer. I understand that, as part of statutory responsibilities to
    support JCIDS urgent and emergent operational needs processes, the
    USD(I&S) assists in validating requirements from an intelligence
    perspective, and further supports solution analysis by identifying
    emerging technologies and capabilities in the Defense Intelligence
    Enterprise or National Intelligence Community. When necessary, the
    USD(I&S) may also facilitate Military or National Intelligence Program
    funding to accelerate the fielding of a necessary and promising
    intelligence capability. The analysis performed by USD(I&S) for urgent
    needs is not limited to major acquisition programs, but may also
    include science, technology, research, and development capabilities
    that are of sufficient Technical Readiness Level to be eligible for
    consideration as a solution to a requirement. From my current
    perspective, I am concerned that intelligence inputs into the DOD
    acquisition process are inordinately focused on major acquisitions
    versus rapid acquisitions, and even then, intelligence inputs often
    arrive too late in the cycle to fully inform the first and most
    critical decisions on which programs to develop and purchase. If DOD
    leaders are to successfully make these hard choices, OUSD(I&S) must
    improve how the DISE delivers accurate and relevant intelligence to
    inform DOD's earliest acquisitions decisions, as well as the entire
    program lifecycle. If confirmed, I intend to leverage all DOD
    authorities available to accelerate these processes to act at the speed
    of operational need.
                     intelligence support to the warfighter
        Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the need for the
    combat support Defense intelligence agencies to provide intelligence
    support to the warfighter with the need to provide intelligence support
    to policymakers?
        Answer. Balancing support to the warfighter with intelligence
    support to policymakers is one of the OUSD(I&S)'s primary
    responsibilities. In today's environment of global and regional
    threats, most issues are relevant to both warfighting commands and
    policymakers. If confirmed, where there remain tactical and operational
    differences, I would work to ensure the DISE continues to satisfy
    requirements for operationally relevant intelligence that directly
    enable warfighter success, and I would work collaboratively across DOD
    and with interagency partners to inform policy and military
    decisionmaking by our national leaders.
        Question. In your view, what opportunities exist across the
    Intelligence Community to improve intelligence support to the
    warfighter? If confirmed, what would you do to leverage these
    opportunities?
        Answer. My experience in uniform underpins my belief in the
    importance of and the continued opportunity to improve collaboration
    across the intelligence community to better support the warfighter.
        If confirmed, I would engage early and often with the combatant
    commanders to improve my understanding of their needs, and I would
    frequently engage leaders within the national intelligence community to
    obtain support to meet those warfighter needs. I am particularly
    interested in applying greater attention to faster, more agile, and
    adaptive processing, exploitation, and dissemination of intelligence
    data to better support the warfighter and others that engage our
    adversaries at the tactical edge--especially as DOD warfighters
    increasingly rely on resilient and survivable sensors further removed
    from the battlefield to inform their tactical decisions.
        Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
    the geographic combatant commands are adequately assessing and
    prioritizing their intelligence needs?
        Answer. I understand that OUSD(I&S) conducts multiple engagements
    with the combatant commands to include regular meetings with all
    combatant command J2s on a variety of issues in order to maintain a
    current understanding of regional risks and intelligence priorities. If
    confirmed, I will promptly establish my own relationships with the
    Combatant Commanders and ensure that they are able to prioritize and
    receive the intelligence support they require.
        Question. In your view, what are the shortfalls, if any, in
    providing the functional combatant commands and combat support agencies
    adequate intelligence support, and ensuring that their intelligence
    needs are prioritized?
        Answer. As I am not yet in the position, I do not have a completely
    informed perspective on this matter. If confirmed, I commit to
    supporting the Secretary's priorities and evaluating intelligence needs
    of the Combatant Commands, Combat Support Agencies, Defense Agencies,
    and Services. I would also strengthen relationships with the Joint
    Staff to assess capability gaps, prioritize needs, and recommend
    strategic alignment of MIP funding against the highest intelligence
    needs of the warfighter in a manner that maximizes our return on our
    investments. Last, I would support the USD(I&S) to work with the DNI to
    closely synchronize NIP and MIP investments to ensure synergy in
    maximizing effects for the warfighter.
        Question. In your view, how are intelligence operations carried out
    by special operations forces different from those carried out by the
    Intelligence Community?
        Answer. I understand that Special Operations Forces (SOF)
    intelligence operations are focused on DOD requirements and priorities.
    These priorities may differ from those of the IC in that they are
    sometimes more tactical, focused on support to military operations or
    preparation of military operations. This intelligence enables a
    commander to make decisions that reduces risk to force and can create
    opportunities for further collection and exploitation. SOF missions
    require accurate, detailed, and timely intelligence that only
    integrated, multi-disciplinary collection and analysis can provide. It
    is essential that SOF intelligence operations are conducted pursuant to
    applicable law and policy, and subject to the requisite intelligence
    oversight rules, consistent with all DOD intelligence activities.
                            innovative technologies
        Question. What role do you see for AI in supporting national and
    economic security?
        Answer. I believe national and economic security have a reciprocal
    relationship. The role of AI for one will generally apply to the other.
    AI has the potential to enhance the speed and efficiency of how the
    DISE provides support to national security. In an environment of
    expanding data sources and a limited workforce, AI could assist in
    triaging and transforming the tasks requiring human attention. We must
    carefully consider the biases and vulnerabilities created through the
    introduction of AI, although it is without question that AI integration
    is necessary and has the potential to provide improved accuracy and
    precision in our support.
        Question. If confirmed, what priority would you assign to ensuring
    that the Defense intelligence enterprise invests in AI applications, as
    well as training and business process reengineering to ensure effective
    use of such applications by the workforce?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that AI is considered in the
    modernization of capabilities, infrastructure, processes, and
    tradecraft within the DISE. We should default to its investment where
    it can improve our speed, accuracy, and efficiency.
        We can learn from AI investment across the government to understand
    where to leverage its potential in shaping our operating environment
    and driving future advantages.
        Question. What role do you envision for AI in bringing greater
    efficiencies, timeliness, and accuracy to intelligence collection,
    analysis, dissemination, and military decisionmaking?
        Answer. I cannot speak highly enough of our intelligence
    professionals. Their expertise and time are invaluable. I believe that
    AI can assist in prioritizing the collection that receives their
    attention and collate that information in a manner that expediates
    their analysis. AI can also be used to improve the efficiency in
    disseminating more relevant, accurate, and actionable intelligence into
    the hands of the warfighter at greater speed and volume, thereby
    enabling better and faster military decisionmaking. AI can also be used
    to create new ways of generating and responding to intelligence
    requirements.
        Question. Are there other technology areas that you view as
    promising as they relate to the intelligence and security functions of
    OUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. I believe that to accomplish the Secretary's objective of
    rebuilding our military capabilities, we must be flexible and
    aggressive in our approach to innovation and adopting commercial
    solutions. Critical to success will be closer integration between DOD
    and the commercial sector in order to identify and pilot new
    capabilities that can be used to maintain an advantage against our
    adversaries at the speed of relevance.
        Additionally, I believe there are a number of promising areas that,
    if confirmed, I will work with OUSD(I&S) components and DISE to support
    regaining decision advantage in today's contested environment. Among
    these areas are: the exploitation of, and our defense against,
    exquisite intelligence collection technologies, such as ubiquitous
    sensing and space ISR; expanding virtual domain operations that disrupt
    adversary intelligence; the use of advanced computing and software to
    improve the efficiency of intelligence collection management; and
    survivable cloud compute and data transport to the tactical edge.
        Question. In your view, does DOD have sufficient numbers and
    expertise in the intelligence community to monitor and analyze
    technological advances in industry, academia and our adversaries
    research establishments that will impact DOD missions and national
    security?
        Answer. As I am not in the position, I am unable to provide a
    comprehensive assessment to answer this question. However, from my
    outside perspective, I am concerned that the DOD may lack sufficient
    quantity and specialization of Science and Technology Intelligence
    (S&TI) personnel that are necessary to remain competitive with our
    adversaries. The sheer volume of information in open-source research
    alone presents challenges for the capability and capacity of human
    analysts, even when paired with AI tools. Additionally, many emerging
    technologies require highly specialized expertise that are either in
    short supply or may not be currently available within the U.S.
    Government and might require changes to DOD authorities to fully
    address. Even with improvements, DOD will increasingly be reliant on
    outside expertise for cutting edge technology, particularly in niche
    fields such as quantum computing, biotechnology, and advanced
    materials. I do not believe that we can rely on traditional
    organizational structures and approaches to solve these new challenges.
    OUSD(I&S) creatively uses existing programs such as the
    Intergovernmental Personnel Act and the Applied Research Laboratory for
    Intelligence & Security to close talent gaps. DOD must also effectively
    leverage commercial sector innovation to help us close these gaps. If
    confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) efforts with the USD(R&E), the
    ODNI, the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), the private sector, and others
    to develop options to ensure that the DISE has access to the expertise
    needed to stay ahead of adversary technological advancements.
        Question. In your view, what areas of emerging technology should we
    be prioritizing collection and analysis to better prepare DOD for
    future conflicts?
        Answer. Although I am not yet in the position and have not had the
    opportunity to be fully briefed at the classified levels, if confirmed,
    I will conduct a full assessment on which emerging technologies we must
    improve collection and analysis against. Beyond traditional focuses for
    collection and analysis, there are emergent technologies that are
    advancing adversary capabilities. We must understand how adversaries
    seek to develop and deploy those technologies, along with identifying
    opportunities for how we can deny adversary employment.
        Some specific areas that we should be prioritizing include quantum,
    space-based technologies and biotechnology.
               counterintelligence, law enforcement, and security
        Question. What is your assessment of current and anticipated
    counterintelligence threats to DOD? Which threats do you assess to be
    the most concerning and why?
        Answer. As I am not yet in the position and briefed on classified
    information, if confirmed, I will seek to understand the
    counterintelligence threat environment at the classified level in order
    to develop informed recommendations to counter threats to our
    intelligence advantage.
        I am aware that the advent of ubiquitous sensing, artificial
    intelligence-powered exploitation of data, and analytics (also referred
    to as data analytics), may make it increasingly challenging for U.S.
    intelligence to operate with the same effectiveness and agility against
    our adversaries without the appropriate modernization of our efforts.
    Additionally, as DOD increasingly relies on space-based capabilities
    for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support to
    warfighters, protecting U.S. space superiority from foreign denial and
    deception grows more essential.
        Question. What is your understanding of the roles and
    responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) to provide strategic direction and
    oversight of implementation of counterintelligence policy, programs,
    guidance, and training to ensure they are responsive to validated DOD
    and national counterintelligence priorities? What changes, if any, in
    these roles and responsibilities would you recommend, if confirmed?
        Answer. I understand the USD(I&S) has broad responsibility for
    oversight of DOD counterintelligence (CI). Further, although I do not
    yet have access to classified information, I understand that the
    Department is implementing its DOD CI Strategy, ``Confronting Threats
    to America's Military Advantage, 2021-2031,'' and has recently
    completed a year-long, end-to-end review to identify CI capability
    requirements, gaps, and solutions to implement that strategy.
        I also understand the USD(I&S) along with the Director of the
    Defense Intelligence Agency is a standing member of the National CI and
    Security Center's National CI Policy Board. In addition, DOD
    participates with the FBI in the National CI Task Force and local CI
    Task Forces under a formal memorandum of understanding. Through this
    and other forums the USD(I&S) provides policy, oversight, advocacy,
    guidance and direction to DOD CI activities conducted, oftentimes, in
    cooperation or in partnership with other Departments and Agencies
    across the U.S. Government.
        One of my major priorities, if confirmed, is to support the
    USD(I&S) to assist the Secretary in reestablishing deterrence by
    presenting him with risk informed options to impose costs on our
    adversaries short of armed conflict. Among these options is a greater
    focus on counterintelligence, and in particular, offensive
    counterintelligence, to disrupt foreign intelligence services before
    they can act with malign intent against the United States.
                     personnel security and insider threat
        Question. The OUSD(I&S) is accountable for managing and overseeing
    DOD's insider threat, personnel security, security clearance process,
    and the National Industrial Security programs. DOD has experienced
    devastating attacks from insider threats--attacks that have led to the
    death and injury of DOD personnel, as well as to the loss of highly
    classified information critical to national security. Recent delays
    have exacerbated backlogs in processing security clearances and
    reinvestigations for DOD personnel.
        Most of these very challenging new and enhanced requirements have
    been assigned to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency
    (DCSA). What is your current assessment of the ability of DCSA to
    transform itself to meet these objectives?
        Answer. I understand that after President Trump transferred the
    background investigation and security clearance function to DCSA in
    2019, DCSA vetting services have proved essential to national-level
    efforts to modernize personnel vetting and uniformly execute the
    National Industrial Security Program. DCSA services establish the
    foundation for execution of various subsequent security requirements
    and procedures which enable the essential concept of security in-depth.
    Additionally, in accordance with Section 847 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, DCSA has been charged to
    prepare to conduct assessments of Foreign Ownership, Control, and
    Influence (FOCI) not only for cleared defense contractors, but also all
    DOD contracts over $5 million--an effort that, if confirmed, I intend
    to assess closely to determine how best to support the FOCI mission in
    an effort to protect the Defense Industrial Base from compromise.
    Ultimately, to effectively and efficiently serve the DOD and other
    Federal agencies, I believe that DCSA requires cutting-edge technology,
    adaptable processes, the capacity to operate at scale, and--perhaps
    most significantly--the best talent available with the skills needed to
    pursue these objectives.
        Although I do not yet have enough information to make a full
    assessment currently, the criticality of these efforts and the State of
    our capabilities relative to the timing of these mandates is
    concerning. If confirmed, I look forward to working with DCSA to fully
    assess the State of play.
        Question. There has been a backlog in processing security
    clearances that has been growing since 2023, after many years of steady
    progress in improving the security clearance process timelines. What is
    your understanding of the current issues causing the backlog and the
    status of efforts within DCSA to reduce that backlog?
        Answer. I am dismayed at the continuing challenges to delivering
    timely security clearances, and if confirmed, it would be a top
    priority to avoid further delay in meeting the requirements of Trusted
    Workforce 2.0. Our national security depends on recruiting and
    retaining highly qualified individuals serving in critical positions
    across the Federal Government and industry, and delays in the security
    clearance process hinders our ability to fill these roles at the speed
    of mission requirements. People are our most important asset, but an
    inefficient and lengthy background investigation and security clearance
    process prevents the DOD from attracting and competing for top-tier
    talent. Every day a scientist, engineer, or analyst waits on their
    clearance to begin Federal work is 1 day closer to taking a job
    elsewhere--or never even applying to the U.S. Government at all.
        If confirmed, I will fully engage with DCSA to understand the
    factors contributing to timeliness concerns and will hold them
    accountable for their performance. I commit to modernizing and
    accelerating the clearance process through rigorous oversight and
    dedication to business transformation, advanced technology, and data-
    driven solutions.
        Question. Specifically, if confirmed, how would you ensure that
    DCSA is highly responsive to the needs of the USD(A&S) for vetting DOD
    contractors in responsibility determinations?
        Answer. I understand that DCSA provides vetting of contractor
    personnel and companies for eligibility to access classified
    information in accordance with regulatory requirements for the National
    Industrial Security Program. This vetting assesses alignment of
    eligibility decisions with national security interests. This is one
    piece of a security apparatus that must work in concert with and at the
    speed of the acquisitions decisionmaking process to enable
    uncompromised delivery of supplies and technologies to properly equip
    our warfighters.
        If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s efforts to prioritize
    collaboration with OUSD(A&S) to optimize security in acquisitions,
    including vetting people and companies within a certain timeframe and
    under conditions that allow the Department to acquire critical
    supplies, services, and technologies at the speed of mission
    requirements.
        Question. What is your understanding of the status of development,
    approval, and implementation of the Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiative?
        Answer. I recognize that Trusted Workforce (TW) 2.0, originally
    launched in 2018 under President Trump, is a national-level reform
    effort aimed at improving overall efficacy of vetting for clearances
    and suitability. While I understand that TW 2.0 may have demonstrated
    some relative progress at times over the last few years, there clearly
    remains unacceptable challenges to full implementation of its
    objective.
        If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s efforts to collaborate
    with our ODNI, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and Office of
    Management and Budget colleagues to evaluate and take appropriate
    action to ensure that DOD fulfills its TW 2.0 responsibilities.
    Furthermore, I commit to keeping DOD's interagency and private industry
    partners fully and regularly informed of DCSA's progress in
    implementing TW 2.0, and identifying to them--as well as the Congress--
    any indications of additional delays or cost overruns in meeting the
    performance and timeliness standards set for the vetting enterprise.
    Specifically, I will work to ensure Department leaders know the impact
    of failing to meet these standards, so efforts can be appropriately
    prioritized in support of Department objectives.
        Question. What is your understanding of the status of development,
    approval, and implementation of continuous vetting initiative?
        Answer. It is my understanding that continuous vetting (CV),
    including the adjudication of CV information, is a key element of
    Trusted Workforce 2.0. As DOD further implements CV, I believe its
    implementation must prioritize advanced technology, capacity, and cost-
    effectiveness. Without an effective and timely CV architecture, DOD
    will be unable to optimize its workforce in a secure manner,
    jeopardizing mission success.
        If confirmed, I will push OUSD(I&S) and DCSA to incorporate modern
    technology, maximize efficiency, and continuously improve the ability
    to identify and assess risk to our Nation's trusted workforce.
    Specifically, I will work to ensure Department leaders know the impact
    of failing to meet these standards set for the vetting enterprise, so
    efforts can be appropriately prioritized in support of Department
    objectives.
        Question. What is your understanding of the remaining challenges in
    achieving reciprocity of clearances and access to classified
    information across government components and their contractors?
        Answer. I am aware of concerns about reciprocity between Federal
    components, particularly with IC agencies. My understanding is that
    reciprocity between DOD components has been significantly improved, but
    the delays in reciprocity that remain are generally related to
    differences between IC agencies in their individual enhanced
    eligibility requirements for access to especially sensitive
    information, such as polygraph requirements.
        If confirmed, I will ensure DOD personnel vetting policies and
    processes are aligned to Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiatives and tracked
    through a performance management system to ensure effective and
    efficient transfer of trust and the mobility of the Federal workforce,
    as well as our contractors and others in private industry who are
    granted clearances.
        Question. In your view, how should DCSA posture the Department to
    deter, detect, and mitigate insider threats before they harm national
    security?
        Answer. Over the course of my military service, I learned time and
    again the importance of empowering leadership and accountability at all
    mission levels. I understand that USD(I&S) is responsible for policy
    and oversight of the Department's Insider Threat program, ensuring DOD
    components have the necessary guidance, resources, and capabilities to
    empower leaders at all levels to manage insider risk to readiness,
    resources, and national security information. I understand that DCSA's
    role in the Insider Threat program is to be a data and system provider,
    enabling information sharing and decentralized program implementation
    so DOD commanders at all levels effectively manage their own risks.
        If confirmed, I will work with DCSA, the Military Departments, and
    other DOD components to ensure component and subordinate level insider
    threat program interoperability with enterprise data and systems.
        Question. How would you characterize the threat posed by foreign
    nations to the integrity of the National Security Innovation Base?
    Which threats do you assess as most concerning, and why?
        Answer. The threat posed by foreign nations to the integrity of the
    National Security Innovation Base is persistent and significant. While
    I am not currently briefed on classified information, from open-source
    reporting I appreciate that the National Security Innovation Base is
    being exploited in sustained attempts to erode U.S. technology
    superiority critical to maintaining a military advantage over
    adversaries and the economic well-being of U.S. industry. Threat actors
    increasingly seek to weaponize the open and collaborative nature of the
    strong partnerships and relationships DOD has cultivated with U.S.
    academic institutions. Additionally, foreign threats don't just include
    outright theft of information through espionage and other illicit
    means, but also rely on more subtle approaches such as foreign
    acquisition of critical nodes within the U.S. supply chain.
        If confirmed, I look forward to further strengthening DOD efforts
    to protect the National Security Innovation Base--to include an
    emphasis on robust intelligence support to Foreign Ownership, Control,
    and Influence mitigation and support to the Committee on Foreign
    Investment in the United States--to thwart our adversaries while
    continuing to support the vital and enabling aspects of innovation. In
    addition to FOCI and the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United
    States (CFIUS) efforts, I believe a key component of this effort will
    be not only enhancing our defensive posture here at home but taking
    action to impose costs on adversaries and reestablish deterrence.
        Question. How would you propose to improve the support provided by
    the DCSA, the DOD counterintelligence organizations, and the national
    Intelligence Community to better protect the National Security
    Innovation Base, and enhance the Department's innovation strategy,
    especially with respect to technology companies that are non-
    traditional DOD contractors?
        Answer. DCSA plays a vital role in safeguarding national security
    by conducting background investigations and granting security
    clearances for DOD personnel and contractors. DCSA also oversees the
    National Industrial Security Program (NISP), which protects classified
    information within the Defense Industrial Base.
        Although the core security principles of the NISP remain valid for
    all companies and contractors, as I understand from open-source
    reporting, the NISP's administrative requirements may lack the agility
    needed to facilitate effective acquisition decisions and ensure supply
    chain integrity in today's landscape, especially for classified
    programs. Furthermore, I am concerned that these regulations do not
    adequately address the needs of the National Security Innovation Base,
    a significant portion of which operates outside of the traditional NISP
    framework. It is these non-traditional DOD contractors that
    increasingly drive national security innovation, presenting DOD with
    the greatest opportunities for leap-ahead technologies, but meanwhile
    posing unique vulnerabilities to our adversaries.
        Question. In your view, is DCSA postured to better leverage
    artificial intelligence and other automation tools to improve due
    diligence vetting, as well as security clearance processes and
    suitability determinations?
        Answer. I recognize the immense potential of artificial
    intelligence and machine learning to revolutionize personnel vetting
    and due diligence. Through automating routine tasks and analyzing vast
    datasets, I believe we could significantly improve the speed and
    accuracy of these vetting processes. If confirmed, I will prioritize
    development and adoption of these technologies across the DOD, working
    closely with DCSA to ensure responsible and effective implementation
    and return on investment.
        Question. According to the ``Fork in the Road'' memo from the
    Office of Personnel Management, ``Employees will be subject to enhanced
    standards of suitability and conduct as we move forward,'' but no
    further guidance has been issued on what that means. What is your
    current understanding of the current definition for ``suitability''
    being used by DOD, the process for those suitability determinations,
    and how that might change?
        Answer. I understand USD Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)) is the
    Department's lead for suitability based on guidance issued by OPM. If
    confirmed, I look forward to working with the USD(P&R) to ensure the
    appropriate intelligence and security inputs are incorporated into
    their guidance.
                         collection & special programs
        Question. In light of the rapidly evolving nature of the national
    security environment, to include significant advances by adversarial
    nations in the development and fielding of capabilities that could
    challenge DOD tradecraft, technologies, methodologies, and processes,
    what do you see as the most pressing challenges to DOD's ability to
    conduct technical and human intelligence collection activities?
        Answer. Adversary investment in advanced technologies such as
    artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and encrypted
    communications, as well as the dispersion of sophisticated capabilities
    across the globe, have complicated the information environment and
    reduced our national security advantage. Additionally, the emergence of
    ubiquitous sensing and the increasing volume of commercially available
    data on individuals and their activity pose novel counterintelligence
    challenges to DOD human intelligence collection activities, operational
    security, force protection, and many other areas of potential
    vulnerability.
        Meanwhile, our own foundational vulnerabilities such as fragmented
    infrastructure, limited interoperability, and outdated network
    architectures amplify the threat from these advanced capabilities.
    Therefore, we must invest in innovation to stay ahead of these advanced
    technologies while building a secure, efficient foundation to move our
    information from sensors to decisionmakers securely and faster than our
    adversaries.
        If confirmed, I will work to smartly allocate and realign resources
    to close the seams that adversaries exploit, raising the barrier and
    cost of conducting intelligence against the U.S., and ensuring our
    intelligence enterprise can securely navigate an era defined by
    relentless digital exposure and ubiquitous technical surveillance. This
    will include DISE efforts to address the reality of global ubiquitous
    sensing, the proliferation of networked, correlated, and automated
    systems, and the algorithms that can exploit gathered information.
        Question. If confirmed, how do you intend to approach these
    challenges to ensure that the DOD intelligence enterprise is postured
    to operate in an increasingly contested security and intelligence
    environment?
        Answer. DOD operates within an increasingly contested security and
    intelligence environment. Embracing new technology and investing in
    innovative solutions is vital to the Department's ability to grasp
    collection opportunities in the physical and digital domains.
        If confirmed, I will lead the continuous review of processes and
    policies to support warfighters and decisionmakers in this changing
    environment. This may require changes in how DOD personnel train and
    use tradecraft, technologies, and methodologies, as well as process
    adjustments for collection analysis. Aggressive efforts to ensure DOD
    is leveraging the best commercial technologies will remain essential,
    as will our ability to rapidly field technologies where required. As we
    adapt our efforts, we must ensure the DOD's intelligence collection
    activities are lawful and conducted in accordance with the United
    States Constitution.
        Alignment across mission and technology needs, modernization of
    planning doctrine in this new landscape, and reducing barrier of entry
    for DOD elements and personnel to access best-in-class capabilities in
    a resource efficient manner is essential in 2025 and beyond.
                             information operations
        Question. What are your views on the roles, responsibilities, and
    preparedness of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
    conduct operations in the information environment, as well as deter and
    defense against such operations by adversaries?
        Answer. I believe that for DOD to compete effectively in the
    information environment, the Defense Intelligence and Security
    Enterprise must inform activities that shape the perceptions of
    specific foreign audiences to gain or maintain a competitive advantage.
    Our efforts to deter and defend against adversary information
    operations should be prioritized with appropriate resources and must
    include more robust coordination and collaboration across the
    Department, including with the USD(P) as the Secretary of Defense's
    Principal Information Operations Advisor, as well as the interagency.
        Question. In your view, how can the Defense Intelligence and
    Security Enterprise better support the requirements of the combatant
    commanders for intelligence to enable their information operations?
        Answer. I believe that the DISE should enhance its ability to
    support Combatant Commanders by focusing on three key areas:
    understanding adversary goals, enabling maneuver in the information
    environment, and identifying proxies and influence networks. First, the
    DISE must improve its intelligence collection and analysis to fully
    understand adversary goals in the information space--what they seek to
    achieve, how they measure success, and where vulnerabilities exist.
    Second, intelligence must be aligned with warfighter requirements to
    facilitate maneuver in the information environment, ensuring that
    commanders can shape narratives, counter adversary information
    operations, and integrate influence activities into broader operational
    planning to support American objectives Finally, the DISE should
    increase its focus on tracking adversary use of proxies and influence
    mechanisms--whether state-sponsored media, cyber actors, or third-party
    enablers--to provide a clearer picture of the information battlespace.
    If confirmed, I look forward to assessing and improving the
    Enterprise's support to information operations in these areas.
                imperative for independent intelligence analysis
        Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
    that DOD intelligence analysts, including those seconded to offices
    that are not part of the defense intelligence structure, are
    independent and free of pressure from influence from their chain of
    command to reach a certain conclusion, including a conclusion that fits
    a particular policy preference?
        Answer. I am deeply committed to ensuring that all defense
    intelligence assessments remain unbiased, objective, and free from
    political interference. An absolute focus on the mission and support of
    the warfighter demands it. The credibility of intelligence
    assessments--and the willingness of our leaders to accept and act on
    those assessments--is predicated on apolitical, non-partisan analytical
    judgments. We cannot support the warfighter or policymaker without the
    best thinking from all of our people in support of our national
    security.
        If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) efforts to work with the
    DIE to ensure that all DOD intelligence analysts adhere to Intelligence
    Community analytic standards promulgated in Intelligence Community
    Directive 203, which mandates that all-source intelligence analysis
    must be objective and independent of political considerations.
                       the defense intelligence workforce
        Question. The USD(I&S) exercises policy oversight of the Defense
    Civilian Intelligence Personnel System (DCIPS) to ensure that defense
    intelligence, counterintelligence, and security components are
    structured; manned; trained--including joint intelligence training,
    certification, education, and professional development; and equipped to
    execute their missions.
        In your view, is the DOD civilian intelligence workforce properly
    sized with the appropriate capabilities, in your view? Please explain
    your answer.
        Answer. As I am not yet in the position, I have not yet had an
    opportunity to comprehensively assess the size or capabilities of the
    DISE workforce. I am aware that the Secretary has directed reductions
    within the civilian defense workforce to more effectively align with
    the Administration's national security priorities, and I fully support
    this critical effort. If confirmed, I will immediately review the work
    that has been done to date across the DISE workforce and provide
    recommendations for how to most effectively meet the requirements of
    the DISE in support of national security.
                                     space
        Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to enhancing
    the interface and synchronization of space-based capabilities resident
    in the Intelligence Community with military space organizations?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s work with the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, the United States
    Space Force, the ODNI, and defense and intelligence agencies to ensure
    roles, responsibilities, and requirements amongst the various
    stakeholder organizations are aligned and mutually support IC and
    military space-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR)
    needs. I would also ensure that DOD and IC ISR space architectures
    remain integrated to maximize ISR support to the Joint Force to achieve
    our national security objectives.
        Question. How would you recommend deconflicting tasking
    requirements in the space warfighting domain across DOD with tasking
    requirements from Intelligence Community customers?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would first work to understand the gaps and
    concerns with existing tasking processes and procedures from the Joint
    Staff, Combatant Command, and Service perspectives. I will then work
    alongside the Joint Staff and ODNI to support the development of new
    processes, tools, and concepts of employment to assure Combatant
    Commanders and warfighters access to the space-based intelligence,
    surveillance, and reconnaissance necessary to support military
    operational requirements. New architectures must be responsive to the
    warfighter.
        Question. The Space Force has been assigned the mission of space-
    based ISR. To ensure the timely presentation of forces and effects to
    the combatant commander by the Space Force, Congress enacted into law
    section 1684 of National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
    (P.L. 118-31), further amended by section 1654 of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (P.L. 118-366) which stated
    that:
        ``The Secretary of the Air Force shall be responsible for
    presenting space-based ground and airborne moving target indication
    systems to the combatant commands to accomplish missions assigned to
    such commands under the Unified Command Plan that--(1) are primarily or
    fully funded by the Department of Defense; and (2) provide near real-
    time, direct support to satisfy the operational requirements of such
    commands.''
        If confirmed, will you adhere to this provision of law?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I would ensure that OUSD(I&S) and the
    Defense Intelligence Enterprise partner with the leads of the MTI
    Working Group established by the fiscal year 2024 NDAA to identify the
    most cost-effective delivery mechanisms to improve lethality.
                     unidentified anomalous phenomena (uap)
        Question. What is your understanding of the current congressional
    concerns regarding transparency and reporting on UAP issues with
    Congress?
        Answer. I am aware of the tremendous public and congressional
    interest in understanding both historical and contemporary UAP
    observations. If confirmed, I am committed to enabling the Department
    of Defense, the Intelligence Community, and National Archives and
    Records Administration to declassify and share information related to
    UAP with the American public to the greatest extent possible. It is
    imperative that we also continue to protect sensitive information
    regarding sources and methods, to ensure that gaps potentially revealed
    by declassification of information to the public--and therefore to our
    adversaries--is a risk-informed decision. When UAP information is
    unable to be safely and responsibly declassified, I am committed to
    providing all such information, at all levels of classification, to the
    appropriate congressional committees of jurisdiction.
        Question. What do you see as the intelligence communities' level of
    effort and focus on the UAP challenge?
        Answer. I understand the Department enjoys strong support from the
    IC and the whole of the DISE for its UAP mission. In line with statute,
    AARO reports to both DOD and the ODNI and regularly convenes a group of
    IC partners to share information and expertise. IC partners routinely
    support AARO in the analysis and resolution of UAP reports. If
    confirmed, I will ensure this strong partnership is sustained.
        Question. The All-Domain Anomalous Resolution Office, or AARO, was
    established to be the central clearinghouse for reporting and analysis
    of UAP incidents.
        Do you believe AARO is adequately staffed and resourced to carry
    out its mission? What areas do you believe AARO should be focusing on?
        Answer. Yes. I understand that AARO is adequately staffed and
    resourced to meet its mission. I believe that AARO should focus on
    fully leveraging partnerships and capabilities across the USG to close
    gaps in domain awareness and minimize technological and intelligence
    surprise. If confirmed, I will ensure AARO has the support it needs to
    succeed, and that its efforts--and that of the DISE--are complementary
    and synchronized with other DOD efforts to address Unmanned Vehicles in
    an effective manner.
        Question. How will you improve the integration of intelligence
    community technical collection assets, such as signals intelligence and
    measurement and signatures intelligence systems, into UAP reporting?
        Answer. I understand that DOD enjoys strong support from the IC in
    this regard. AARO convenes multiple UAP Communities of Interest that
    engage IC partners to draw on their expertise, resources, and
    capabilities. If confirmed, I will ensure continued DOD collaboration
    with IC partners to expand and improve technical collection for UAP
    detected in air, sea, or space.
                               sexual harassment
        Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
    receive or otherwise become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment
    or discrimination from an employee of the OUSD(I&S)?
        Answer. Every member of the DISE workforce is entitled to work in
    an environment free of harassment or discrimination of any type. If
    confirmed, I will ensure that leaders across the DISE are acting to
    ensure that our workplace is free of harmful sexual or other harassment
    or discrimination and will take immediate action to correct and hold
    accountable those responsible for actions counter to law and policy.
                               detainee treatment
        Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
    specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
    22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
    Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014?
        Answer. Yes, I support the standards for detainee treatment
    specified in Army Field Manual 2-22.3, Human Intelligence Collector
    Operations and DOD Directive 2310.01E, Department of Defense Detainee
    Program.
        Question. Section 2441 of title 18, U.S. Code, defines grave
    breaches of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, including
    torture and cruel and inhuman treatment.
        In your view, does section 2441 define these terms in a way that
    provides U.S. detainees in the custody of other nations, as well as
    foreign detainees in U.S. custody appropriate protections from abusive
    treatment?
        Answer. Yes.
                            whistleblower protection
        Question. Section 1034 of title 10, U.S. Code, prohibits taking or
    threatening to take an unfavorable personnel action against a member of
    the armed forces in retaliation for making a protected communication.
    Section 2302 of title 5, U.S. Code, provides similar protections to
    Federal civilian employees. By definition, protected communications
    include communications to certain individuals and organizations outside
    of the chain of command, including the Congress.
        If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that military
    and civilian members of the Defense Intelligence and Security
    Enterprise who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement--
    including in classified programs--to appropriate authorities within or
    outside the chain of command--are protected from reprisal and
    retaliation, including from the very highest levels of DOD and the
    broader Intelligence Community?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring protections are afforded
    to DISE employees who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross
    mismanagement, in a manner consistent with law, regulation, and policy.
    Additionally, I will ensure that personnel who pursue retaliatory
    actions upon protected personnel are addressed appropriately, as
    established by law, regulation, and policy.
        Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in ensuring
    consistency in the application and interpretation of whistleblower
    protections across the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring DOD policy implementing
    such protections is applied consistently and uniformly in accordance
    with law.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this Committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
    of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
    briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
    communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
    to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
    committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
    basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
    reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
    and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
    or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
    Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
    materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
    records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
    information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
    with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
    request, to provide this Committee and its subcommittees with records
    and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
    a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
    you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
    this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
    retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
    employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
    subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
    answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
                      resourcing intelligence capabilities
        1. Senator Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh, I note in your opening statement,
    you stated: ``I believe that we do not have the resources to cover all
    threats simultaneously, therefore we must be deliberate and discerning
    about the capabilities we pursue . . . '' Do you agree that we face the
    most complex and dangerous security environment since World War II?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I agree that we face a very complex, dynamic, and
    constantly changing security environment. Under President Trump's
    leadership, the Department is focused on achieving Peace through
    Strength and will continue to enhance, advance, and invest in
    capabilities to defend against the emerging threats facing our Nation
    and against U.S. interests abroad. If confirmed, I will support the
    efforts of the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Intelligence and Security to ensure that defense and national
    intelligence resources and capabilities are aligned to defend against
    these emerging threats and security challenges.

        2. Senator Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh, do you agree that we should be
    growing our intelligence capabilities to deal with the growing threats
    our Nation faces instead of reducing our footprint in key theaters like
    Europe and the Middle East?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I agree it is necessary to enhance our intelligence
    capabilities in line with the President's and Department of Defense
    priorities to enable the achievement of Peace through Strength, defend
    the homeland, and deter emerging threats facing our Nation. If
    confirmed, I will support the Secretary of Defense and Under Secretary
    of Defense for Intelligence and Security in ensuring the alignment of
    defense and national intelligence resources to address these emerging
    security challenges.
                                   __________
                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
                                 8(a) contracts
        3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, the Small Business Act (SBA)
    8(a) program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through
    which sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small
    businesses owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
    Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
    corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
    classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
    earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
    (CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
    rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
    to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
    to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
    Department of the Defense?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I fully support merit-based efforts
    to increase U.S. companies' participation in the marketplace,
    particularly in enriching our Defense Industrial Base. I do not support
    any efforts that award public moneys based on the immutable
    characteristics of the applicants. I appreciate the unique value that
    Alaska Native corporations, Community Development Corporations, Indian
    tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations bring to the DOD through the
    8(a) program. If confirmed, I commit to working with you and others in
    Congress to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting, ensuring that
    such contracts meet stringent security requirements while leveraging
    their proven efficiency.

        4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
    contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
    Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
    mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
    warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
    buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
    flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
    you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
    initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I understand that the 8(a) program
    offers valuable flexibility and efficiency in contracting, delivering
    cost-effective, mission-critical solutions that bolster national
    security and warfighter readiness. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
    OUSD(I&S) supports initiatives like the 8(a) program as long as they
    continue to show benefit to the Warfighter and American Taxpayer.

        5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, rapid response capabilities are
    essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
    same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
    our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
    efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
    to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
    and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
    Department of Defense.
        Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I recognize that rapid response
    capabilities are critical for warfighters, and the 8(a) program offers
    a valuable avenue for achieving this through flexible, secure, and
    efficient contracting.
                      protecting the u.s. industrial base
        6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, the United States defense
    industrial base has always been a major target for foreign espionage--
    especially by major adversaries like China and Russia. One concerning
    trend the last few years is the very real threat of sabotage of
    industrial base assets by foreign agents. We saw attempts attributed to
    Russia to sabotage critical defense industrial base infrastructure in
    NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] countries since 2022. Germany
    and the United Kingdom for instance both saw fires and explosions break
    out at ammunition and missile facilities linked to the War in Ukraine.
    We saw an assassination plot against the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
    of Rheinmetall, a major German arms supplier, and fires set by
    explosive devices that went off at DHL logistics hubs in Germany,
    England, and Poland bound for aircraft. If confirmed, will you commit
    to doing an assessment of the security of the U.S. defense industrial
    base against the types of plots I just described and report back to
    Congress as soon as possible about ways we could better protect these
    critical nodes?
        Mr. Overbaugh. The increasing threat of foreign espionage and
    sabotage, particularly from adversaries like China and Russia, demands
    our urgent and coordinated attention. Concerning incidents in Europe,
    such as those targeting ammunition and logistics facilities, underscore
    the vulnerabilities within our defense industrial base and a shift
    toward more aggressive tactics. If confirmed, I commit to a thorough
    review of our security posture throughout the U.S. defense industrial
    base, prioritizing protection against espionage and sabotage. I will
    work closely with DOD leadership and Congress to ensure we have the
    necessary resources, policies, and partnerships to safeguard this
    critical asset, maintaining our national security and competitive edge.
                           collaboration with israel
        7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, for more than 4 decades, Iran
    has served as the primary source of instability and chaos in the Middle
    East. Hamas would not have been able to carry out the attacks of
    October 7 without Iran's support. In Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and
    beyond, Iran has, and continues to, work against American interests.
    Iran today could produce weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear weapon
    in just a week and multiple bombs in under a month. Iranian petroleum
    exports remain at or near levels not seen in more than 6 years,
    providing funding for their terrorist activity. Do you agree Iran must
    be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh: The President said that Iran must be
    stopped from getting a nuclear weapon due to its destabilizing role in
    the Middle East, funding of proxies, and rapid uranium enrichment
    capacity. The United States should smartly leverage all aspects of
    National power to counter Iran's stalling and prevent its
    nuclearization.

        8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, in your view, what more should
    the United States be doing to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear
    weapon?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh: The United States could leverage
    multilateral sanctions, cyber operations, and regional alliances to
    pressure Iran, while signaling military readiness and engaging in tough
    diplomacy to prevent nuclear weapon development. Direct military action
    should only be used as a last resort and only when clear we can
    reasonably expect to achieve our limited military objectives. To
    counter Iran's stalling tactics in ongoing nuclear talks, the United
    States similarly could consider tightening sanctions and the escalation
    of cyber operations thus bolstering regional deterrence in coordination
    with allies to pressure Tehran into a verifiable deal before the 2025
    sanctions deadline.
                                   __________
                    Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
                              allies and partners
        9. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, our network of allies and partners
    remains our greatest asymmetric advantage in strategic competition with
    China, Russia, and others. Do you agree that robust intelligence
    sharing with allies and partners is critical for our national security?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I agree that robust intelligence sharing
    relationships with allies and partners contributes to our national
    security. Through these relationships, we are able to share the burdens
    of intelligence and security activities undertaken against global
    actors that negatively impact our national security, and we are able to
    inform and influence foreign policymakers' decision calculus as they
    determine what is best for their countries.

        10. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe that in order to
    maintain robust intelligence sharing that our foreign partners must
    have trust that we will protect the information they share with us?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Trust is the cornerstone for developing and
    maintaining robust intelligence sharing with our foreign partners. Our
    allies and partners must trust us, and we must trust them when it comes
    to information and having that trust is based on durable relationships.

        11. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, when there are public reports that
    senior U.S. officials have been sharing classified and sensitive
    information in unclassified channels, do you agree that foreign
    partners are less likely to share their information with us?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Our foreign relationships are based on trust and
    mutual benefit to our national security, which we will never violate.
    For countries with whom we have intelligence sharing arrangements, we
    commit to protecting information received from the partner. If
    intelligence they provide to us begins to be treated arbitrarily, I
    believe we could see a decrease in what they might be willing to share
    with the United States.

        12. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed as Deputy Under
    Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (DUSD(I&S)), what
    specific actions would you recommend to strengthen existing
    intelligence and counterintelligence relationships with foreign
    governments and international organizations?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will validate the State of existing
    intelligence sharing arrangements with our allies and partners and
    ensure efforts support U.S. national security objectives and the burden
    of the associated intelligence activities is shared appropriately. I
    will also take action to ensure the Defense Intelligence Enterprise is
    pursuing cooperation, intelligence sharing, and interoperability to the
    fullest practicable extent. By pursuing such collaborative efforts, the
    United States and like-minded partners can optimize resources in
    fiscally restrained environments to deepen coordination, strengthen
    deterrence, preserve our warfighting advantage, and increase the
    resilience of our force.
                  civilian workforce cuts and vulnerabilities
        13. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, former intelligence officials have
    expressed concern that the Trump administration's indiscriminate cuts
    to the civilian workforce--including across the Department of Defense
    (DOD) and the Intelligence Community--could create a significant
    counterintelligence vulnerability. In your view, does sudden
    professional and financial instability make a person more of a
    counterintelligence risk?
        Mr. Overbaugh. A top priority for the Department must be educating
    our workforce, both current and former, on the threats posed by foreign
    intelligence entities. If confirmed, I will assess the effectiveness of
    our counterintelligence awareness and reporting programs, ensuring we
    equip individuals to recognize and report targeting by foreign
    adversaries. Critically, our awareness efforts must also highlight
    support structures for personal challenges like mental health or
    financial difficulties. While these challenges do not cause betrayal,
    ensuring access to support can mitigate vulnerabilities and strengthen
    our overall security posture.
                   strategic declassification of intelligence
        14. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, in the lead up to Russia's
    invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration was successful in
    deliberately releasing information derived from intelligence in an
    effort to expose Russia's true plans and intentions and shape the views
    of the international community. Previous Central Intelligence Agency
    (CIA) Director Williams Burns published an article last year where he
    emphasized the importance of ``strategic declassification'' or ``the
    intentional public disclosure of certain secrets to undercut rivals and
    rally allies.'' For years, the geographic combatant commands have been
    pushing for more widespread use of strategic declassification in
    support of information operations. What are your views on the
    importance of strategic declassification of intelligence in support of
    information operations?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I recognize the strategic value of the carefully
    considered declassification of intelligence. If confirmed, I will
    approach declassification in support of information operations with a
    focus on both maximizing its strategic benefit in the information
    environment while upholding the principles of transparency and public
    trust with respect to intelligence and other national security
    information.

        15. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe strategic
    declassification could be used more widely while still protecting
    sensitive sources and methods and what are the challenges from an
    intelligence community perspective?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I believe there is benefit to the selective
    declassification or sanitization of information in support of foreign
    policy objectives when it is done in a manner that takes into
    consideration the overall effect on sources and methods. Usually, it is
    not the one-time declassification of information that affects our
    sources and methods, but a compilation of declassification activities
    that can then cause harm.
                  defense intelligence and security enterprise
        16. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) is vested with responsibility for
    the overall direction and supervision of the Defense Intelligence and
    Security Enterprise. What is your understanding of the role of the
    Office of USD(I&S) in the oversight of the activities of the Defense
    Intelligence and Security Enterprise?
        Mr. Overbaugh. The USD(I&S) is responsible for planning, policy,
    and strategic oversight for all defense intelligence,
    counterintelligence and security policy, plans, and programs.
    Additionally, the USD(I&S) exercises authority, direction, and control
    over the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Geospatial Intelligence
    Agency, National Security Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, and
    the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) on behalf of
    the Secretary of Defense.

        17. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, how would you seek
    to coordinate such activities across the broader Intelligence
    Community?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I take seriously the USD(I&S) oversight
    responsibility of the activities of the Defense Intelligence and
    Security Enterprise. If confirmed, I commit to taking an active
    oversight role in the Enterprise to coordinate with the broader IC and
    will support the USD(I&S)'s role as the DNI's Director for Defense
    Intelligence. In doing so, I will ensure robust engagement with ODNI to
    advocate for IC investments, capabilities, and activities that address
    DOD requirements.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
                           anomalous health incidents
        18. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Overbaugh, I've long been concerned about
    directed energy attacks on our servicemembers, diplomats, and
    Intelligence Community abroad. In 2021, Congress passed the HAVANA Act
    and secured $10 million to help Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) victims
    pay for their care. In the fall of 2024, DOD published its interim rule
    that unlocked the ability to provide payments to victims.
        Mr. Overbaugh. However, these payments have still not gone out and
    I am hearing that victims are continuing to pay for care out of their
    own pockets. My office has been in contact with former Defense
    Intelligence Agency (DIA) officials who are going into debt to cover
    their medical bills.
        Brave men and women who have put their lives on the line for our
    country are going into medical debt because they cannot access funds
    meant for them is frustrating, to say the least. If confirmed, will you
    commit to getting HAVANA Act payments out to the AHI victims as soon as
    possible?
        I share your concern regarding those who may have been affected by
    Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI). I have not yet been briefed on the
    status of HAVANA Act payments. However, I commit to you that I will
    take actions necessary to expedite these payments if they have not been
    made, as required.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
                                     ethics
        19. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
    contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
    as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
    my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
    restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
    contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
    of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
    rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
    confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
    honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
    compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        20. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
    ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
    consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
    years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
    my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
    restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
    contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
    of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
    rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
    confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
    honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
    compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        21. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit not to seek
    employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
    from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
    government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
    my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
    restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
    contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
    of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
    rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
    confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
    honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
    compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        22. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, during your nomination process,
    did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
    related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.

        23. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you were approached about
    your loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or other
    similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that pledge
    or oath.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.

        24. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you were approached about
    your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
    representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.

        25. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, in November 2024, the New York
    Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
    adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
    prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
    positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
    joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        26. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you did discuss the
    possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
    Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
    position within the Administration?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No. I have never met with or spoken with Mr.
    Epshteyn.

        27. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, at any time, did lawyers for
    President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
    regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
    describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
    documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
    information pertaining to this interaction.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        28. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, were you in contact with Mr.
    Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
    describe the nature of those contacts.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No. I have never met with or spoken to Mr. Musk.

        29. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, was Mr. Musk present or involved
    in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
    describe the nature of his involvement.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        30. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
    with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
    indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        31. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, who was in the room or
    participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I met with various staffers from the Administration
    before I was nominated, but the President nominate me.

        32. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you own any stock or hold any
    other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
    to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I will comply with all provisions of the Ethics
    Agreement.

        33. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what do you consider the role of
    the press in a democracy?
        Mr. Overbaugh. The role of a free press is to inform the public,
    hold power to account, and support democratic society by ensuring
    transparency, fostering debate, and protecting individual rights.

        34. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you think it would be an
    appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
    who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
    administration?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        35. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit not to
    retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
    facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
    articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
    Trump administration?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        36. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you requested, or has
    anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party
    sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar
    agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
    capacity?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        37. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you voluntarily release any
    individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Not Applicable.

        38. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you ever paid or promised
    to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
    individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
    disparagement, or similar agreement?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        39. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if the answer to the previous
    question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
    were the circumstances?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Not Applicable.

        40. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to recuse
    yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
    employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
    employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
    my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
    restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
    contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
    of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
    rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
    confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
    honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
    compliance with the applicable ethics rules.

        41. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, please provide a list of all
    your clients at Strategic Decision Solutions, Arcuri Group LLC, and
    Resilient National within the last 5 years.
        Mr. Overbaugh. My Resilient National clients were Strategic
    Decision Solutions and Keystone Bible Church. I do not have, and cannot
    gain, access to Strategic Decision Solutions or Arcuri Group LLC for
    the past 5 years. congressional Oversight and Transparency

        42. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
    the role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
    Inspectors General?
        Mr. Overbaugh. The Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG)
    and the service Inspectors General (Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.) play
    critical oversight roles within the U.S. military and defense
    establishment. Their primary purpose is to ensure integrity,
    efficiency, and accountability in defense operations and personnel
    conduct.

        43. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you ensure your staff
    complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
    communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        44. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are not able to comply
    with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
    Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
    for any good faith delay or denial?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will work to comply with Inspector
    General requests in a timely manner. I would defer to the Office of the
    Inspector General to update members of the Committee regarding the
    progress of the Inspector General's ongoing reviews.

        45. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
    including the President?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will follow the U.S. Constitution
    and other laws of the United States.

        46. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what actions would you take if
    you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
    President?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I reject the premise of this question. The President
    would never give me an illegal order. If confirmed, I would work with
    appropriate officials if given an order that I believed was illegal.

        47. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to voluntarily
    provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        48. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to voluntarily
    testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        49. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to testify or
    provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
    to do so?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        50. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to providing
    information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
    to do so?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        51. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you provide information or
    documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        52. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to following
    current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
    and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
    Services Committees and their minority members?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.

        53. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, will you commit to
    posting your official calendar monthly?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I am committed to meeting all legal
    disclosure requirements.

        54. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you think the Federal
    Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
    examples of overclassification you have encountered.
        Mr. Overbaugh. I believe there is a widespread perception that the
    Federal Government struggles with overclassification. I have not had
    direct access to classified information in my current role to cite
    specific examples, but I understand the concern that excessive
    classification can hinder transparency, impede informed public
    discourse, and stifle innovation. If confirmed, I commit to working
    diligently to review classification procedures to ensure that
    information is classified only when truly necessary to protect national
    security and that declassification processes are efficient and
    effective.

        55. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you think your
    department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
    declassification?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
                                  project 2025
        56. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
    transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        57. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Overbaugh. No. As far as I am aware, I do not know anyone in
    the Heritage Foundation. I am, however, committed to hearing from and
    engaging with a wide range of perspectives, those that I agree with,
    those that I disagree with, and everyone in between. In addition, I
    will always be transparent about my interactions and honest about how
    those perspectives shape my understanding.
                               foreign influence
        58. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you received any payment
    from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
    within the past 5 years?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No, I have not.

        59. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you communicated with any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes. Through my work as a Military Intelligence
    Officer, I have engaged with numerous FVEY, NATO, and other allies and
    partners in the last 5 years. I have not engaged with any foreign
    government or entity outside of my military requirements.

        60. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, please disclose any
    communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
        Mr. Overbaugh. I have had no communications or payments as
    described.
                            impoundment control act
        61. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe the Secretary of
    Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block the
    disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I have no considered this issue before. If
    confronted with this hypothetical, I would work with officials from the
    Office of the General Counsel.

        62. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Overbaugh. My understanding is that Congress enacted the
    Impoundment Control Act in 1974. This Act provides a framework for
    handling circumstances in which the President seeks to defer or cancel
    execution of appropriated funds. I commit, if confirmed, to executing
    my responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other
    laws on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions
    and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by
    the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        63. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to complying with
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
    on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
    advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        64. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to notifying the
    Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
    minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
    Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
    authorizes?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
    on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
    advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        65. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, the Constitution's Spending
    Clause (Art. I, Sec.  8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
    Sec.  9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
    The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
    that impoundments are constitutional?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
    on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
    advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        66. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, the funding levels in
    appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
    instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
    stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
    discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
    including appropriations legislation. I would ensure that my actions
    and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by
    the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        67. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
    the requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes
    and appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress
    deems it to do so?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
    including authorization and appropriations legislation. I would ensure
    that my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter
    are informed by the Administration's legal positions and advice from
    the Department's General Counsel's office.

        68. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to expending the
    money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to expending resources in
    accordance with congressional appropriations and authorizations for
    those programs within my authority. I would ensure that my actions and
    advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel's office.

        69. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to following and
    implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
    Authorization Act passed into law?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
    responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
    including the National Defense Authorization Act. I would ensure that
    my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are
    informed the Administration's legal positions and advice from the
    Department's General Counsel's office.

        70. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you became aware of a
    potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
    or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, were I to become aware of any
    violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act, or other
    appropriations laws, I would abide by the Department's procedures to
    report such violations to the appropriate authorities. I would further
    ensure that my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense regarding
    any such violations are informed by the Administration's legal
    positions and advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
                            research and development
        71. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, does the Federal Government
    benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I strongly believe the Federal Government
    benefits significantly from engaging with certain colleges,
    universities, nonprofits, and federally Funded Research and Development
    Centers (FFRDCs). I understand that OUSD(I&S) sponsors a university
    affiliated research center (UARC) to foster innovation and assist in
    developing the next generation of talent in critical intelligence and
    security career fields. I understand UARCs and FFRDCS are key to
    addressing 21st century technology challenges by engaging academia,
    government, and industry to provide objective, trusted advice on
    critical national security issues.

        72. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, under your leadership, will your
    agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers to research and
    address our toughest national security challenges?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to continuing to engage with
    FFRDCs, UARCs, and other institutions of higher learning to develop new
    and transformative technology and analysis for the warfighter
    consistent with the Administration's mission and priorities.
             protecting classified information and federal records
        73. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
    the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I understand that protecting operations security
    (OPSEC) is critical to safeguarding our national security. OPSEC
    requires the identification and protection of critical information from
    exploitation by adversaries. A strong OPSEC posture, built on awareness
    and vigilance, is essential at all levels. If confirmed, I will
    prioritize OPSEC, coupled with information security, to protect and
    enable all our operations and decisions.

        74. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what are the national security
    risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Improper disclosure of classified information poses
    significant risks to our national security. It can compromise
    intelligence sources and methods, putting lives at risk and hindering
    our ability to gather critical intelligence. It can reveal sensitive
    military plans and capabilities, giving adversaries an advantage on the
    battlefield. It can undermine diplomatic efforts, damage relationships
    with allies and partners, and erode trust in the United States.
    Furthermore, it can harm our economic competitiveness by revealing
    proprietary information and technological advantages. In short, the
    improper disclosure of classified information can have far-reaching and
    devastating consequences for our national security, and I take this
    matter with the utmost seriousness.

        75. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what would you do if you learned
    an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If I learned that an official had improperly
    disclosed classified information, I would take immediate and decisive
    action to ensure the incident is reported to the appropriate
    authorities for investigation, contain the damage, assess the scope of
    the disclosure, and work to mitigate any harm to national security. I
    would also address any vulnerabilities in our security posture that
    contributed to the disclosure. The protection of controlled and
    classified information is paramount, and I would treat any breach with
    the seriousness it deserves.

        76. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
    government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will adhere to the Federal Records
    Act and the applicable DOD policies that implement it, which ensure
    that the Federal records I create or receive are appropriately
    maintained, and I will hold the personnel of the Defense Intelligence
    and Security Enterprise accountable for the same.

        77. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, should classified information be
    shared on unclassified commercial systems?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.
                   retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
        78. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe that
    servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
    protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
    illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
    any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.

        79. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you ever retaliated against
    any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
    assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
    that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Overbaugh. No.

        80. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
    do so.
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
    whistleblowers in accordance with applicable law. I will foster a
    culture where the organization understands that doing so supports the
    mission.

        81. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
    forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
    negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.

        82. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
    advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
    their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
    decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
    protected activity?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, each of those actions could amount to an act of
    retaliation, depending on the circumstances.

        83. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
    prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
    individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
    actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
    to that individual engaging in protected activity?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, each of those actions could amount to an act of
    retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
                         politicization of the military
        84. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit not
    to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers for
    executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.
                            unauthorized disclosures
        85. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is the normal process after
    the Department becomes aware of indications that classified or
    sensitive defense or intelligence information has been found in the
    public sphere?
        Mr. Overbaugh. I understand that DOD takes immediate action
    whenever there is credible information that classified or sensitive
    defense information has been found in the public sphere. This could
    involve initiating an inquiry or investigation to assess the scope of
    the potential compromise, secure any compromised information to the
    extent possible, and identify the source of the unauthorized
    disclosure. If circumstances warrant, DOD then pursues appropriate
    administrative, legal, or other remedial actions based on the findings
    of the inquiry or investigation.

        86. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit to
    holding senior officials who violate protections of sensitive
    information to the same standard as junior soldiers and civilians?
        Mr. Overbaugh. All DOD personnel with access to classified
    information are responsible for protecting such information. If
    confirmed, I understand my responsibilities will include directing,
    administering, and overseeing the DOD Information Security Program, on
    behalf of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. I will advocate for a
    culture of accountability at all levels, backed up by clear,
    modernized, and standardized guidance, to ensure that all DOD personnel
    support this shared and sacred obligation.

        87. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit to
    providing documented justifications to this Committee for any actions
    taken to remove or re-detail individuals as a result of the memo
    entitled ``Efforts to Combat Unauthorized Disclosures,'' dated 21 March
    2025?
        Mr. Overbaugh. Although I am familiar with the publicly released
    memorandum, I am not familiar with actions or activities it may have
    initiated. If I am confirmed, I would certainly anticipate being
    brought up to speed on any such actions and will commit to working with
    Congress, without impeding any investigative matters.

        88. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit that
    your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
    official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
    both oversight and institutional memory?
        Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring that all
    deliberations and decisions are communicated through official, secure
    channels. Furthermore, I will ensure that all decisions are properly
    documented to facilitate effective oversight and maintain institutional
    memory. Recognizing the need for speed and security, I will also work
    closely with the DOD CIO to ensure we have modernized communication
    tools that enable secure decisionmaking at mission speeds. This is
    critical for maintaining security, accountability, transparency, and
    operational effectiveness within the organization.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh, which
    was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Justin P.
    Overbaugh in connection with his nomination follows:]

       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                    ------

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the committee's executive files.]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh was reported to
    the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on September 18, 2025.]
                                    ------

        [Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Daniel Zimmerman by
    Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
    follow:]

                            Questions and Responses
                           duties and qualifications
        Question. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
    Security Affairs (ASD(ISA)) is the principal advisor to the Under
    Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Secretary of Defense on
    international security strategy and policy on issues of Defense
    Department interest that relate to the nations and international
    organizations of Europe (including the North Atlantic Treaty
    Organization and Russia), the Middle East, Africa, and their
    governments and defense establishments.
        What is your understanding of the duties and functions of the
    ASD(ISA) under current regulations and practices?
        Answer. My understanding of the duties and functions of the
    Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs
    (ASD(ISA)) are based on U.S. code and applicable DOD guidance (see DOD
    Directive 5111.07). Statutorily and by guidance the ASD(ISA), under the
    authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Policy (USD(P)), is the principal civilian advisor to the Secretary of
    Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the USD(P) on all matters
    relating to international security strategy and policy issues related
    to nations and international organizations in Europe, including the
    North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union;
    Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia; the Middle East; and Africa. To fulfill
    the National Defense Strategy, the ASD(ISA) conducts defense relations
    in this assigned area of responsibility, develops country-specific and
    regional security strategy and policy, and issues guidance to translate
    and incorporate national and DOD policy into these approaches.
        Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and functions would
    you expect the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense
    for Policy to prescribe for you?
        Answer. I am not aware of any additional duties and
    responsibilities that would be prescribed by the Secretary, but I would
    be prepared to assume additional ones that are compatible with
    effectively meeting the core responsibilities and duties of the
    position.
        Question. What background and experience do you possess that
    qualify you for this position?
        Answer. I have enjoyed the tremendous privilege to serve my country
    for nearly two decades in a variety of leadership and national security
    roles through my career at the Central Intelligence Agency. My duties
    have involved many of the most pressing issues confronting our national
    security, including matters related directly to portfolio of the
    ASD(ISA), as I understand it.
        As a briefer for the President's Daily Brief, I presented our
    government's most sensitive national security insights to senior
    policymakers on a daily basis, discussing issues ranging from China and
    advanced weapons to Iran and terrorism. I was a senior member of the
    White House team that developed the Abraham Accords and participated in
    diplomatic engagements throughout the Middle East. I have managed the
    interagency process at both the Central Intelligence Agency and the
    National Security Council (NSC), and I have led analytic teams on cyber
    threats, energy security, and global trade. I have worked on sensitive
    projects in the Eurasia theater and served alongside special operations
    forces in the warzone. I have experience working closely with foreign
    liaison partners worldwide to advance U.S. and shared interests. My
    Senate fellowship in Senator Hagerty's office has equipped me with an
    understanding and deep respect for the role of Congress in national
    security policy. My academic background includes studies in
    international diplomacy, military and economic statecraft, financial
    mathematics, and history.
                             conflicts of interest
        Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
    prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
    or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
    relationships, have a financial interest.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
    potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
    family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
    influencing your decisionmaking?
        Answer. I agree to comply with all conflicts of interest disclosure
    requirements set forth in the Ethics in Government Act and implementing
    regulations.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
    if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
    participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
        Answer. I agree to comply with all recusal requirements under 18
    U.S.C. Sec.  208 and implementing regulations.
        Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    decide matters on the merits, and exclusively in the public interest,
    without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
        Answer. I commit to deciding matters on the merits based on the
    public interest, without regard to any private gain or personal
    benefit.
                        major challenges and priorities
        Question. If confirmed, what broad priorities would you establish?
        Answer. I support the President's America First, peace through
    strength agenda. I agree with Secretary Hegseth that China and securing
    the homeland constitute our country's top security challenges and are
    the right priorities for defense policy.
        If confirmed, I would work under Under Secretary Colby to further
    the Department's policy objectives. As I understand them with respect
    to the ASD(ISA) area of responsibility, these should include among
    others pursuing a durable peace in Ukraine, spurring urgent defense
    investments and greater responsibility from NATO allies, addressing
    threats presented by Russia, partnering with key ally Israel, denying
    Iran a nuclear weapon, countering terrorist threats to the homeland,
    and preventing China from geostrategic advances in these theaters.
        In addition to such policy aims, if confirmed, I would also strive
    to provide diligent, accountable, and humble leadership in the
    position.
        Question. In your view, what are the major challenges, if any, you
    would confront if confirmed as ASD(ISA)?
        Answer. In my understanding, the major challenge of the ASD(ISA)
    portfolio will be to help optimize the allocation of defense resources.
    I agree with Secretary Hegseth that China and securing the homeland
    must take precedence, and that reviving the defense industrial base and
    enhancing readiness are fundamental to that. In my view, the ASD(ISA)
    must be ready to help position the Department to focus on these
    priorities while resolutely addressing persistent threats facing the
    United States stemming from Russia, Iran, terrorism, and China's
    expanding influence in the Middle East and Africa. I see effective
    partner engagements that enable and drive greater burden sharing as
    vital for this end.
        If confirmed, I would also anticipate the organizational challenge
    of quickly mastering Department processes and ensuring my advice,
    leadership, and decisionmaking are timely, informed, and effective
    toward furthering U.S. national security interests and Department
    policy.
        Question. If confirmed, what management actions and timelines would
    you establish to address each of these challenges?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would take a number of actions to address
    these challenges, starting with understanding existing Departmental
    guidance and requesting briefings on all the core elements of the
    ASD(ISA) portfolio to ensure I am prepared to provide optimal advice
    and support to Under Secretary Colby and Secretary Hegseth in advancing
    the President's defense priorities. Based on previous interagency
    management experience, I would plan to swiftly establish clear
    communication and workflow practices, and to develop productive
    relationships with my colleagues at DOD as well as with counterparts
    across the NSC, State Department, Intelligence Community, and all
    relevant departments. I would focus closely on upcoming allied
    engagements to promote the Administration's clear message encouraging
    allies and partners to take greater ownership of their security needs.
    I would pursue excellent communication with Congress to ensure the
    Department receives appropriate congressional input on matters related
    to the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
              detainee treatment and naval station guantanamo bay
        Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
    specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
    22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
    Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014, and
    required by section 1045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
    Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92)?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Special Operations and Low-Intensity conflict conducts oversight of
    detainee treatment.
        Question. What are your views on the continued use of the detention
    facility at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Special Operations and Low-Intensity conflict conducts oversight of
    Guantanamo Bay operational policy.
        Question. Executive Order 13567 established the Periodic Review
    Board (PRB) Periodic Review of Individuals Detained at Guantanamo Bay
    Naval Station Pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force
    process.
        If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to address the
    cases of detainees already recommended by a PRB for transfer from
    Guantanamo to another nation?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. In your view, what standard of care should govern the
    physical and mental health services provided to detainees at
    Guantanamo, whether they are migrants or law of war detainees?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. What is your understanding of the authorities that are
    available to the Department of Defense to transfer migrants and hold
    them at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. What are your views on the objectives and outcomes of the
    Department's Military Commission process?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Military Commissions process
    provides standards and processes for trials of alien unprivileged enemy
    belligerents for violations of the law of war and other offenses
    triable by military commission. If confirmed, I would not anticipate
    being directly involved in policy decisions regarding the Office of
    Military Commissions and Military Commissions proceedings. However, I
    support ensuring that policy is not an impediment to thorough and
    speedy justice for those responsible for the 9/11 attacks and other
    terrorist attacks.
        Question. Section 2441 of title 18, U.S. Code, defines grave
    breaches of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, including
    torture and cruel and inhuman treatment.
        In your view, does section 2441 define these terms in a way that
    provides U.S. detainees in the custody of other nations, as well as
    foreign detainees in U.S. custody appropriate protections from abusive
    treatment?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
         u.s. northern command/defense support to civilian authorities
        Question. Civil authorities may request DOD support for domestic
    disasters and certain counter-drug operations as well as in managing
    the consequences of a terrorist event employing a weapon of mass
    destruction.
        In your view, are the procedures by which other Federal, State, and
    Local agencies request DOD support efficient and effective?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs oversees defense support
    of civil authorities policy, authorities, and processes.
        Question. In your view, are DOD procedures for evaluating and
    approving the provision of support requested by a civil authority
    efficient, effective, and timely?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. What is your understanding of the factors that are
    considered in determining whether DOD will provide support to a civil
    authority?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. What types of assistance in this context are
    inappropriate, in your view?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. What role do you believe that DOD should play in
    addressing security at the southwest border? What aspects of the
    current DOD role at the southwest border, if any, could be improved?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs oversees defense support
    of civil authorities policy, authorities, and processes.
                             u.s. southern command
        Question. If confirmed, what recommendations would you make to the
    President to deter Russian and Chinese influence in the SOUTHCOM AOR?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
    for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs and the Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities have
    responsibility for DOD strategy and policy in the U.S. Southern Command
    (USSOUTHCOM) area of responsibility (AOR) and the Western Hemisphere
    and advise on USSOUTHCOM posture and activities.
        Question. Do you believe these influences threaten hemispheric
    security and prosperity?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
                      counternarcotics activities (so/lic)
        Question. DOD serves as lead agency for the detection and
    monitoring of aerial and maritime foreign shipments of drugs flowing
    toward the United States. On an annual basis, DOD expends nearly $1
    billion to build the counternarcotics capacity of U.S. Federal, State,
    and local law enforcement agencies and certain foreign governments.
        What changes, if any, should be made to DOD's counternarcotics
    strategy and supporting activities?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. I believe the narcotics threat facing our country is a true
    menace and deserves an all-of-government response. My understanding is
    that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
    Intensity Conflict oversees the DOD counternarcotics program.
        Question. Corruption and the absence of the rule of law enable the
    transnational criminal organizations' narcotics trade that contributes
    to the flow of illegal drugs into the United States.
        In your view, what should be DOD's role in countering the flow of
    narcotics to nations other than the United States?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. To what extent do you view our allies and partners in the
    region as partners in countering counternarcotics and other illicit
    activities?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
        Question. How, if at all, should U.S. security assistance be scoped
    to address factors at the root of counternarcotics trafficking, in your
    opinion?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question.
                      approaches to strategic competition
        Question. The Department of Defense published Interim National
    Defense Strategic Guidance (INDSG) on March 13, 2025. The INDSG
    supersedes the Biden Administration's 2022 National Defense Strategy.
    The INDSG prioritizes defense of the homeland and deterrence of China
    over all other threats. The underlying premise of the strategy assumes
    that limited resources should serve to constrain America's strategic
    appetite--indeed the INDSG indicates a preference for limited defense
    spending and a reduced focus on Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
        In your view, what are the distinctions between the military
    capabilities and capacities the United States needs to prevail in day-
    to-day strategic competition with Russia and the capabilities and
    capacities it needs to deter Russia's use of military force to achieve
    political objectives and, if necessary, prevail in a military conflict
    with the Russia?
        Answer. In my understanding, the Department and the Administration
    judges that U.S. military strategy needs to focus our resources on
    defending the homeland and deterring China. For regions such as Europe
    and the Middle East that still hold key U.S. interests, it will be
    critical to maintain a network of allies and partners that the United
    States can count on to field capabilities necessary to defend
    themselves effectively, with more focused U.S. support. This applies
    across the spectrum from competition to armed conflict and will require
    many of our allies and partners, especially in Europe, to accelerate
    investments in their militaries, societal resilience, and defense
    industrial capacity. Fortunately, from public reporting, it seems that
    our allies have heard this call and are stepping up to take greater
    ownership of their defense needs. If confirmed, critical to my role
    will be clearly and persuasively aligning our allies' defense goals
    with those of the President.
        Question. In your view, what are the enduring advantages that
    enable the United States to prevail in strategic competition with
    Russia and with China? If confirmed, what policies and approaches would
    you implement to sustain and strengthen those advantages?
        Answer. The United States must possess the world's most lethal
    fighting force. If confirmed, I would work to sustain and strengthen
    this advantage.
        Question. In your assessment, what new capabilities are needed for
    the Joint Force to compete below the threshold of armed conflict?
        Answer. In my understanding, the United States is well positioned
    to operate below the threshold of armed conflict to defend the Homeland
    and deter China in the Indo-Pacific in alignment with the INDSG. If
    confirmed, I commit to working with our Combatant Command and
    Departmental leaders to understand and advocate for resourcing any
    additional and novel capabilities in this space.
        Question. If confirmed, what policies would you propose to counter
    Russia's efforts to compete strategically below the threshold of armed
    conflict in regions within the ASD(ISA)'s responsibility?
        Answer. I would like to study this issue more closely and receive
    the relevant briefings before offering a well-informed view. For allies
    to contribute effectively to these strategies, they must surge defense
    spending and swiftly strengthen security capabilities, as President
    Trump and Secretary Hegseth have urged them to do. If confirmed as
    ASD(ISA), securing greater allied burden sharing and accountability
    will be one of my top priorities.
        Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
    the People's Republic of China in the regions within the ASD(ISA)'s
    responsibility?
        Answer. The military threat posed by China is the most serious and
    pressing for the United States. The 2025 Annual Threat Assessment of
    the U.S. Intelligence Community states that China presents the most
    comprehensive and robust military threat to U.S. national security. The
    heightened risk of simultaneous aggression against the United States
    and its allies is a significant and growing challenge. European nations
    stepping up and leading on conventional defense and deterrence of
    Russia in Europe will be vital to mitigate the threat of simultaneous
    aggression against the United States and its allies. The presence of
    China in the Middle East threatens a key geographic area which could
    become critical in the event of a Pacific contingency. In Africa, China
    has deepened engagement to bolster relationships with African countries
    and their militaries. China has looked to gain African countries'
    support for establishing maritime points of presence to advance its
    goal of developing the People's Liberation Army into a global
    expeditionary force that can project power well beyond the Indo-
    Pacific.
        Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
    Russia?
        Answer. Russia's nuclear, missile, and other asymmetric
    capabilities enable Russia to pose a direct military threat to the
    United States, the rest of NATO, and other allies. Russia's battle-
    hardened military poses a serious threat to Eastern Europe, including
    NATO members.
        Question. What is your assessment of the threat posed by collusion
    among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea?
        Answer. I am deeply concerned that China, Russia, Iran, and North
    Korea have increasingly collaborated with each other in recent years,
    presenting heightened security challenges to the United States and our
    allies. The United States must take such coordination seriously, since
    too many of our allies are inadequately prepared to assume greater
    security burdens, and the United States itself would be hard pressed to
    adequately fight multiple major wars. This is a key challenge I would
    focus on addressing if confirmed as ASD(ISA).
        Question. In your view, should the Defense Department's force
    sizing construct be based on the need to conduct simultaneous conflicts
    in Asia and Europe?
        Answer. In my view, a strategy that prioritizes defending the
    homeland and deterring China while fostering increased burden-sharing
    from allies and partners, especially in Europe, is the best force
    planning construct. This can position the United States and our allies
    to deter--or if necessary fight and win--simultaneous conflicts in the
    Indo-Pacific and Europe.
        Question. If confirmed, what would you do if you determine that the
    DOD cannot meet the demands placed on it by the President's defense
    strategy?
        Answer. The Department must be responsive to the President. If
    confirmed, I would work under the guidance of the Secretary and USD(P)
    to ensure we prioritize the Department's activities and resources to
    achieve the President's intent.
        Question. How do you view issues of economic competition as part of
    the border strategic competition environment? What role, if any, should
    DOD have in assessing, influencing or impacting economic competition as
    part of its broader strategy?
        Answer. I strongly support Secretary Hegseth's goal of rebuilding
    the military by reviving our defense industrial base, reforming our
    acquisition process, passing a financial audit, and rapidly fielding
    emerging technologies. I see the combination of these initiatives being
    the foundation of DOD's role in supporting a broader U.S. Government
    strategy for economic competition.
                         u.s. european command (eucom)
        Question. Do you believe the deterrent posture in Europe is
    sufficient to deter further Russian aggression in Europe?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
    global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
    missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
    engage in this effort, including addressing this question.
        Question. In your assessment, are there capability and/or capacity
    shortfalls in current U.S. posture that affect the U.S. ability to
    carry out the EUCOM Theater Campaign Plan?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
    global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
    missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
    contribute to this effort, including addressing this question.
        Question. In your assessment, does the United States have
    sufficient air and missile defense capability and capacity to defend
    critical infrastructure in EUCOM? If not, what are the areas of highest
    risk?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
    global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
    missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
    contribute to this effort, including addressing this question.
        Question. If confirmed, what specific changes would you make to
    U.S. capabilities or force posture in Europe to execute the Interim
    National Defense Strategic Guidance more effectively?
        Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
    question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
    global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
    missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM using the INDSG to guide the
    process. If confirmed, I would actively contribute to this effort,
    including addressing this question.
        Question. Defender Europe 2025 and other exercises the United
    States conducts with European Allies and partners illustrate our
    collective ability to mobilize large forces rapidly to respond to a
    crisis.
        Do you support DOD maintaining the large scale and frequent
    exercises it has conducted in Europe in recent years?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review the resource requirements
    necessary to achieve our national security objectives in Europe in
    light of our global strategic and defense priorities as indicated by
    President Trump and Secretary Hegseth.
    European Deterrence Initiative (EDI)
        Question. Since establishment of the EDI in 2014, the NDAA has
    authorized billions of dollars each year for EDI investments to support
    stability and security, and to deter Russian aggression.
        In your view, has EDI improved U.S. and allied capability and
    capacity to deter Russian aggression in the European theater?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would review and provide my best advice to
    my leadership on the allocation of resources across the different
    theaters and recommend investments that best protect U.S. interests,
    deter conflict, and leverage the investments of our allies to provide
    for their own defense.
        Question. Do you believe continued, robust funding for programs,
    activities, and investments under EDI's five lines of effort is
    required to support implementation of EUCOM's mission to deter and
    defend against aggression?
        Answer. It is my understanding that the EDI's lines of effort--
    increased presence, exercises and training, enhanced prepositioning,
    improved infrastructure, and building partner capacity--have
    contributed to the capabilities and readiness of U.S. forces in
    USEUCOM, of NATO allies, and of regional partners. If confirmed, I
    would review the resource requirements necessary to achieve our
    national security objectives in Europe in light of our global strategic
    and defense priorities as indicated by President Trump and Secretary
    Hegseth.
    NATO Alliance
        Question. In your view, how important to U.S. strategic interests
    is the U.S. commitment to its obligations under the North Atlantic
    Treaty, especially Article 5?
        Answer. I believe NATO holds far-reaching importance for the United
    States and that our commitments to the alliance are grave and serious.
    My understanding is that the President has said the United States
    remains committed to NATO. The United States remains the only country
    that has invoked Article 5 commitments, which gives that provision
    special significance. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have been
    clear that Article 3 is also important, and I agree with the
    Administration's vision for all members to contribute to a NATO that is
    more lethal, ready, and relevant. The alliance must adapt, and if
    confirmed it will be my particular responsibility to ensure that
    European and Canadian NATO allies do their part.
        Question. What do you view as the essential strategic objectives of
    the NATO Alliance and what do you perceive to be the greatest
    challenges in meeting those objectives?
        Answer. My understanding is that NATO's strategic objectives are to
    deter conflict in Europe and defeat threats to treaty Allies should
    deterrence fail. NATO is, and should refocus on being, a military
    alliance to defend the member states in the Euro-Atlantic area. A great
    challenge to those objectives is that Russia now has a battle-hardened
    military while Europe's development of combat-credible forces and its
    defense industrial base has lagged. Meanwhile, China poses a grave and
    near-term threat to U.S. interest in the Indo-Pacific. A sense of
    urgency among our allies is needed to achieve a NATO that is more
    lethal, ready, and relevant.
        Question. NATO has long held the position that, ``as long as
    nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance.'' In your
    view, do you believe this principle requires the United States to
    continue to deploy nuclear weapons in NATO countries?
        Answer. I support this principle, and my understanding is that the
    presence of U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe has proven to be a key
    tenant of the alliance and played a fundamental role deterring conflict
    and aggression.
        Question. Do you believe that NATO should expand the nuclear
    sharing role to additional alliance members?
        Answer. I understand this has been a topic of ongoing debate in
    think tank channels, but I would like to study this question more
    closely and receive briefings on the topic before offering a view. I do
    not have sufficient information at this time to give an informed
    answer.
        Question. What do you see as the benefits, or negative
    consequences, of NATO countries individually pursuing their own nuclear
    weapons?
        Answer. I would like to study this question more closely and have
    an opportunity to engage our NATO allies on their views of NATO's
    nuclear deterrence posture before offering my own perspective. If
    confirmed, I would make it a priority to assess and engage on this
    issue in light of our global defense requirements in this critical
    area.
        Question. The dual-hatted position of the Commander of EUCOM as
    NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) allows U.S. and Allied
    forces to be highly integrated in Europe. Similar dual-hat
    responsibilities have been integrated to other senior U.S. Commanders,
    including Commander of U.S. Air Forces Europe and Africa as Commander
    NATO Allied Air Command (AIRCOM) and Commander U.S. Army Europe and
    Africa as NATO Allied Land Command Commander.
        What is your assessment of the benefits of these dual-hatted
    structures to allied cohesion and integration?
        Answer. I am not currently in a position to make a fully informed
    analysis of the pros and cons of the dual-hatted structures.
        Question. Do you share current EUCOM Commander General Cavoli's
    view that the dual-hatted role for the EUCOM Commander as SACEUR is
    important and, as he testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
    that not having an American in the role of SACEUR ``would bring some
    challenges in terms of nuclear command and control''?
        Answer. The SACEUR is an important position and I am not aware of
    any Department plans to relinquish it. If confirmed, I would consult
    with my leadership as well as military colleagues in the Joint Staff
    and USEUCOM prior to making recommendations.
    Russia
        Question. In your view, does Russia pose a threat to the United
    States, its allies, or its interests in the AOR and globally? If so,
    please describe how you perceive that threat.
        Answer. Yes. Despite facing international sanctions since 2014,
    which were further strengthened during the first Trump Administration,
    Russia has maintained a capable military, developed its strategic
    capabilities, and increased production of crucial military equipment.
    Of particular concern is Russia's expansion of its nuclear arsenal,
    posing a threat to the U.S. homeland, as well as its tactical nuclear
    weapons, which threaten its European and Asian neighbors. Russia also
    presents challenges in cyberspace, undersea, space, and the Arctic.
        Question. In your view, which EUCOM and NATO activities most
    effectively deter Russia and mitigate the Russian threat to NATO
    Allies?
        Answer. I do not believe I am not in a position at this time to
    give the informed answer this question deserves. I understand the
    Department of Defense has begun conducting a global force posture
    review to assess the effectiveness of existing missions and forces
    assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively support USD(P) in
    this effort, including addressing this question.
        Question. What aspects of U.S. and NATO force posture do you assess
    as having the most significant deterrent effect on Russia?
        Answer. I do not believe I am not in a position at this time to
    give the informed answer this question deserves. I understand the
    Department of Defense has begun conducting a global force posture
    review to assess the effectiveness of existing missions and forces
    assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively support USD(P) in
    this effort, including addressing this question.
        Question. In your view, what more should DOD do to counter Russian
    malign influence in Europe?
        Answer. While I have worked on this issue extensively from within
    the Intelligence Community, I do not believe I am not in a position at
    this time to give the informed answer this question deserves from a DOD
    perspective. I understand the Department of Defense has begun
    conducting a global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of
    existing missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would
    actively support USD(P) in this effort, including addressing this
    question.
    Ukraine
        Question. In February 2022, Russia launched a full-scale,
    unprovoked, and illegal invasion in Ukraine.
        What do you believe to be Russia's military objectives in Ukraine?
        Answer. I do not believe I have all the relevant information at my
    disposal, including classified information, to fully assess this
    question.
        Question. What do you believe would be the implications for United
    States national security interests if Russia were able to achieve its
    goals in Ukraine?
        Answer. Russia remains a serious military threat to U.S. and
    European security, and thus credible deterrence remains a strategic
    imperative. As President Trump has repeatedly emphasized, it is vitally
    important that our European allies lead from the front in providing
    security assistance to Ukraine and deterring further Russian
    aggression, including by rapidly increasing their own defense spending
    and production.
        Question. Do you believe it is important for the United States to
    continue support, including security assistance to help Ukraine deter
    and defeat Russian aggression? If not, why not?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would support the Administration's goal to
    forge a durable peace in Ukraine. I believe it is important for Ukraine
    to be well-armed to support its self-defense, even after the war is
    concluded. My understanding is that the United States has already
    contributed a very great deal to Ukraine's defense and must weigh
    future assistance against urgent security needs elsewhere, including
    protecting U.S. territorial integrity and deterring threats from China.
    The President has rightly emphasized Europe should lead from the front
    in securing Ukraine's future. If confirmed, I would make it a priority
    to advance this overall approach.
                         u.s. africa command (africom)
        Question. AFRICOM has minimal assigned forces and, as a result, is
    required to compete for the vast majority of its U.S. forces in the
    global force management process.
        What is your assessment of the availability and predictability of
    forces and associated capabilities to support the AFRICOM Theater
    Campaign Plan, the NDS, and other emergency requirements?
        Answer. It is my understanding that USAFRICOM has no assigned
    forces and fewer allocated forces than most other Combatant Commands. I
    also understand that it competes for capabilities when it faces an
    emerging requirement. If confirmed, I would carefully review all
    requirements to provide the best advice on whether existing missions
    and forces allocated to USAFRICOM are sufficient to support DOD's
    priorities given the competitive geostrategic environment.
        Question. Are there any changes you would recommend to the
    allocation or assignment of forces to AFRICOM, if confirmed?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would carefully review all requirements to
    provide the best advice on whether existing missions and forces
    assigned to USAFRICOM are sufficient to support DOD's priorities given
    the competitive geostrategic environment.
        Question. What should be the primary objectives of the DOD
    specifically, and the United States more broadly, in the AFRICOM AOR?
        Answer. In my understanding, the Department's two key objectives in
    the USAFRICOM AOR are to degrade terrorist groups' ability to strike
    the U.S. homeland or overseas equities and to counter China's attempts
    to project military power.
        Question. What is your assessment of the strategic objectives of
    Russia and China in Africa? In what areas, if any, do these oppose U.S.
    and partner objectives?
        Answer. With 53 countries in USAFRICOM's AOR it is hard to
    generalize, yet my understanding is that China and Russia both actively
    seek deeper engagement and influence across the continent. China has
    sought to bolster relationships with African countries and their
    militaries and to use investment to create dependencies, while gaining
    African countries' support for its global policy objectives. China
    looks to Africa as a launchpad for expanding military power beyond the
    Pacific. Meanwhile, Russia uses extractive and destabilizing means to
    assert influence in Africa, including paramilitary deployments, seeking
    to create dependencies on Russian military assets. These activities are
    too often at the expense of African countries and opposed to U.S. and
    partners' shared objectives for stability and security.
                         u.s. central command (centcom)
        Question. In your opinion, what are the key U.S. national security
    interests in the Middle East? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. In my view, key U.S. national security interests in the
    Middle East include countering terrorist threats to the homeland,
    denying Iran a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles,
    promoting the security of model ally Israel, supporting the free flow
    of goods and trade, and generally acting increasingly as a security
    enabler and integrator for our regional partners.
        Counterterrorism remains a key national security priority in the
    USCENTCOM AOR. Several terrorist groups aspire to possess either the
    intent or capability to strike the U.S. homeland or U.S. personnel.
        The Middle East also remains at risk of nuclear proliferation by
    Iran. If confirmed, I will help ensure that the Department of Defense
    stands ready to support the President's National Security Presidential
    Memorandum on Iran, which among other provisions specifically says it
    is the policy of the United States to deny Iran a nuclear weapon.
        The United States has strong partners in the Middle East with whom
    we have overlapping interests, long-standing cooperation, and
    substantial economic and technological trade ties.
        Question. In your opinion, to what extent does achieving U.S.
    national security interests in the Middle East require a continuous
    U.S. military presence, and in your view is the current U.S. force
    presence appropriately sized? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I understand the Department is currently reviewing global
    force posture to ensure the optimal level of forces are assigned to
    USCENTCOM to achieve regional and global defense strategy goals. If
    confirmed, I would support this review and advise the Secretary and
    USD(P) on the force posture necessary to achieve the President's
    national security objectives. It is my understanding that the
    Department of Defense strives to maintain the capability to surge
    forces anywhere in the world to respond to regional threats and
    emerging crises.
        Question. What opportunities exist for increasing burden-sharing
    with U.S. partners to counter threats emanating from and affecting the
    CENTCOM AOR?
        Answer. My understanding is that the United States collaborates
    effectively with multiple partners in the region to counter threats
    emanating from and affecting the USCENTCOM AOR. I believe our partners
    can and must take greater ownership of their own defense. This is both
    in their interest and ours. If confirmed, I would seek increased
    opportunities to enable regional partners to counter terrorist groups,
    defend their sovereign territories, and cooperate on countering Iran
    and its threat network.
        Question. What threat does Chinese and Russian involvement in the
    Middle East pose to U.S. operations and interests and to what extent
    does a continuous U.S. presence counter their involvement? In your
    view, what other policy tools might be useful in this regard?
        Answer. Given its size, energy resources, location, and other
    factors, the Middle East is relevant to great power competition with
    China and Russia. The United States can counter Chinese and Russian
    involvement in the region through strong relationships with partners
    who are enabled and empowered across a full spectrum of activities.
    Iran
        Question. What is your understanding of the objectives of the U.S.
    national security interests with respect to Iran? What is the role of
    the U.S. military in this strategy?
        Answer. I fully support the President's National Security
    Presidential Memorandum on Iran, which establishes that: 1) Iran should
    be denied a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles; 2)
    Iran's terrorist network should be neutralized; and 3) Iran's
    aggressive development of missiles, as well as other asymmetric and
    conventional weapons capabilities, should be countered. The U.S.
    military, alongside other elements of national power and allied
    capabilities, plays a critical role in this strategy.
        Question. What is your assessment of the current military threat
    posed by Iran? What is your assessment of the threat posed by Iranian
    proxy groups? In your opinion, what is the most effective way to defeat
    Iranian proxy groups?
        Answer. Iran poses a significant threat to the security of the
    United States and its allies and partners. Last year, Iran launched two
    unprecedented major missile and drone barrages against Israel from
    Iranian territory. In addition to its conventional military, Iran also
    leverages proxy forces to launch kinetic attacks and advance Tehran's
    aims across the Middle East. These forces have been significantly
    weakened but still threaten U.S. forces and our partners. Iran also
    continues to further its ability to gain a nuclear weapons capability,
    which the President has rightly said cannot happen.
        Question. In your view, what would be the security implications for
    U.S. and regional security interests should Iran acquire a nuclear
    weapons capability?
        Answer. The President has said clearly that the United States will
    not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and I support that position.
    The President has also clearly expressed his preference to negotiate an
    agreement that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. I support
    the President's policy approach to produce a far better agreement than
    the shortsighted Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. For its part, the
    Department's role is to ensure that the President is armed with the
    best possible military options to deny Iran a nuclear weapon. If
    confirmed, I would regard it as my responsibility to ensure that the
    Secretary and the President have the best possible military options for
    this purpose.
        Question. In your opinion, can Iran be sufficiently deterred
    through military force alone? Please explain your answer.
        Answer. I support the President's stated intent to address Iran's
    malign activity through non-military tools if possible, including
    economic pressure and diplomacy. At the same time, it is the Department
    of Defense's role to ensure the President is armed with the best
    possible military options. If confirmed, I would ensure the President
    has these.
    Israel
        Question. In your opinion, what are U.S. national security
    objectives with regards to Israel?
        Answer. I believe that the U.S.-Israel alliance is of great
    importance to the United States and that enabling Israel's security and
    ability to defend itself is a key U.S. national security objective.
    Israel is a model ally for the United States in its self-reliance,
    independence, and grit. My understanding is that the Department of
    Defense supports Israel's security by helping facilitate security
    assistance to Israel, extensive military cooperation through USCENTCOM
    channels, and through coordination with the Israelis to help secure the
    release of all hostages held by Hamas, including American citizens.
        Question. In your opinion, what should DOD's role be in supporting
    Israeli efforts to degrade and defeat Hamas?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would fully back U.S. support for Israel's
    security and its ability to defend itself. Hamas started this war on
    October 7, 2023 by launching a horrific and unprovoked terrorist attack
    on Israel. Hamas killed more than 1,200 innocent people, including 46
    Americans, and took some 250 hostages. The United States should provide
    the security assistance that Israel needs to defeat Hamas and prevent
    future attacks. I support measures by the Trump Administration to
    bolster support to Israel, including through the release of the
    shipment of 2,000 lb. bombs previously paused.
        Question. Should U.S. policy toward Israel include work toward a
    two-State solution?
        Answer. From a Department of Defense standpoint, U.S. policy toward
    Israel should support U.S. interests, which includes close partnership
    with our model ally Israel and the re-establishment of deterrence and
    stability in the region. If confirmed, I would support the President's
    vision for peace in the Middle East.
    Syria and Iraq
        Question. What is your understanding of current U.S. strategy and
    objectives in Syria? How have those objectives changed, if at all, in
    light of the fall of the Assad regime?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Department is closely watching
    developments in Syria with a primary objective of maintaining pressure
    on ISIS and responding to any other terrorist threats to the United
    States that arise, while, as President Trump has indicated, limiting
    the U.S. presence there. If confirmed, I would work to continue to
    review our objectives in light of the fall of the Assad regime.
        Question. From a DOD perspective, what must be done to ensure the
    enduring defeat of ISIS? What non-military efforts are needed for the
    enduring defeat of ISIS?
        Answer. I understand that the U.S. military supports the enduring
    defeat of ISIS through counterterrorism operations and by enabling key
    ally and partner militaries to assume the burden for addressing
    terrorist threats within their own countries. More broadly, the
    enduring defeat of ISIS will require a whole-of-government effort, to
    include intelligence and law enforcement.
        Question. What do you perceive to be the role of the Syrian
    Democratic Forces and Iraqi Security Forces in countering ISIS and al
    Qaeda?
        Answer. My understanding is that these partners have played a
    critical role in our efforts to counter ISIS and al Qaeda. If
    confirmed, I would seek the appropriate briefings on the current role
    of these forces to ensure a full-picture assessment and determination
    on the future of U.S. counterterrorism policy in the region.
        Question. In your view, should U.S. troop levels in Syria be tied
    to the achievement of certain conditions on the ground? If so, what
    conditions would you factor into your recommendation to the President
    on future troop levels in Syria?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Secretary as of mid-April has
    directed a consolidation of U.S. forces in Syria, reflecting the
    significant achievements we have made toward degrading ISIS that go
    back to President Trump's first term. Moving forward, the deployment of
    U.S. troops in any foreign country should always be tied to specific
    objectives and conditions. If confirmed, I would review this issue
    closely and shape my recommendations to the USD(P) by this principle.
        Question. In September 2024, the U.S.-Iraq Higher Military
    Commission announced the transition of the global coalition to defeat
    ISIS to a bilateral security relationship with the Government of Iraq.
    However, many of the details of such a transition are still being
    negotiated with the Iraqi Government.
        In your view, what should the guiding principles for DOD's presence
    in Iraq moving forward?
        Answer. The deployment of U.S. troops in any foreign country should
    be assessed continually based on changing objectives and conditions on
    the ground. If confirmed, I would seek a thorough analysis along these
    lines prior to making a recommendation.
        Question. Do you assess that U.S. forces should remain in Iraq
    beyond next September? Why or why not?
        Answer. My understanding is that the United States and Iraq agreed
    in September 2024 to wind down Operation INHERENT RESOLVE inside Iraq
    by September 2025, and to continue counter-ISIS operations in Syria
    from Iraq until at least September 2026. If confirmed, I would study
    the security implications of this matter closely and ensure that they
    are considered in the global force posture review.
    Middle East Regional Partners
        Question. In your view, what support should DOD provide the
    Lebanese Armed Forces?
        Answer. My understanding is that the Department's current
    objectives are to strengthen Lebanon's sovereignty by building the
    capabilities of the Lebanese Armed Forces to counter internal and
    terrorist threats and combat corruption. I understand that the aim of
    these capacity building efforts is to reduce regional tensions, improve
    Israel's security along its northern border, and further degrade Iran's
    influence in Lebanon. If confirmed, I would look at whether these
    efforts are performing against their objectives and generally be open
    to DOD support that advances the Administration's security assistance
    priorities in the Middle East and beyond.
        Question. In your view, what support should DOD provide to the
    Jordanian Armed Forces?
        Answer. If confirmed, I would look at this question closely and
    generally be open to DOD support that advances the Administration's
    security assistance priorities in the Middle East and beyond. Jordan
    has proven itself an important U.S. partner for promoting regional
    stability. My understanding is that the Department already works with
    Jordan to enhance the capabilities of the Jordanian Armed Forces to
    defeat threats posed by terrorist organizations, including ISIS, to
    counter the smuggling of narcotics and illicit weapons across Jordan's
    borders, and to detect and intercept unmanned aerial systems and
    missile threats that continue to violate Jordanian sovereignty and
    endanger U.S. and partner forces in the region.
    Defense Security Cooperation
        Question. In your view, what are the necessary and appropriate
    strategic objectives that should underpin the Defense Department's
    approach to building the capabilities of a partner nation's security
    forces?
        Answer. The Department's approach to building the capabilities of
    foreign partners should advance U.S. national security and foreign
    policy objectives and must be planned and resourced accordingly. If
    confirmed, I would conduct and manage defense relations within the
    ASD(ISA) portfolio to further the Administration's objectives of
    increased readiness, complementary alliances, and greater burden
    sharing.
        Question. In the competition with near-peer rivals, what steps
    would you recommend, if confirmed, to ensure that the United States is
    taking a strategic approach to its security cooperation with allies and
    partners?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will review the specific steps needed to
    ensure that security cooperation is appropriately aligned with the
    Administration's strategic objectives. In a resource-constrained
    environment, the Department's security cooperation activities must be
    carefully tailored toward the highest-priority threats facing the
    United States.
        Question. Do you have any recommendations for how to improve
    coordination of international armaments cooperation activities,
    including FMS, across the various stakeholders in Policy, A&S, and R&E?
        Answer. I believe it is vital to bring efficiency to the foreign
    military sales (FMS) process. If confirmed, I will review existing
    rules and regulations involved in the development, execution, and
    monitoring of foreign defense sales, look for opportunities to increase
    government-industry collaboration, and advance our competitiveness
    abroad.
        Question. Do you have views on how DOD might be able to streamline
    and improve that parts of the FMS process under its control to improve
    coordination and timeliness?
        Answer. The United States must maintain the strongest and most
    technologically advanced military in the world, along with a robust
    network of capable partners and allies. In my understanding, the FMS
    process is a vital part of encouraging our allies to strengthen their
    defense capabilities and increase burden sharing. I believe the FMS
    process should be agile, able to adapt to demands and respond to
    current and emerging security concerns. If confirmed, I will review
    existing processes and collaborate with the relevant stakeholders in
    the FMS process to further the Administration's goals of improving
    accountability and transparency in the FMS system, and to ensure
    predictable and reliable delivery of capabilities to our allies and
    partners.
                                     cyber
        Question. In September 2023, DOD released its 2023 Cyber Strategy.
    The strategy charges DOD to persistently engage malicious cyber actors
    and other malign threats to U.S. interests in cyberspace.
        What do you perceive to be the role of the ASD(ISA) in
    accomplishing these objectives, and how will you deconflict with the
    roles and responsibilities of the newly established ASD(Cyber Policy)?
        Answer. The ASD for Cyber Policy (CP) is the senior official
    responsible for overall supervision of DOD policy for cyber issues and
    is the Principal Cyber Advisor to the Secretary of Defense. If
    confirmed, I will work with the ASD(CP) to ensure the Department is
    best positioned to deter adversaries and non-State entities from
    seeking to threaten the political, military, or economic preeminence of
    the United States. In that vein, I will support ASD(CP)'s role by
    reflecting the President's and Secretary's objective of increasing
    DOD's effectiveness in the cyber domain in my own bilateral and
    multilateral engagements, including through coordination and
    deconfliction of cyber activities and operations with highly capable
    allies and partners.
        Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to strengthen the role
    between your office and other DOD organizations that contribute to
    these objectives, such as United States Cyber Command and the ASD for
    Cyber Policy?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will work in close collaboration with the
    ASD(CP) and the Commander of USCYBERCOM to ensure the Department's
    cyber policies are consistent with the Administration's priorities, as
    they relate to alliances and partnerships falling under the ASD(ISA)
    portfolio.
        Question. What role do you see ASD(ISA) having in integrating cyber
    into broader defense strategies for deterrence or force employment?
        Answer. ASD(ISA) is responsible for managing the Department's
    relationships with key allies and partners, many of which are highly
    capable in the cyber domain. I believe ASD(ISA) should play a role in
    integrating our military cyberspace capabilities with other tools of
    national power, such as intelligence, diplomacy, and economic sanctions
    to advance U.S. national security objectives. If confirmed, I will work
    closely with ASD(CP) and other key stakeholders in the Department such
    as USCYBERCOM and other Combatant Commands to integrate the strengths
    of our most advanced cyber partnerships into our broader deterrence and
    defense planning, force employment planning, and strategy formulation.
        Question. What role do you see for ASD(ISA) in international cyber
    engagement activities, including the potential of cyber tools and
    equipment for consideration in the FMS process?
        Answer. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have been clear that
    in order to restore peace through strength, the Department must defend
    the homeland, deter China, and increase burden-sharing with allies and
    partners to address all threats. If confirmed as ASD(ISA), I will work
    closely with ASD(CP) to ensure that the cyber tools and equipment we
    share with international partners in my portfolio enable them to
    reinforce the security of Department of Defense networks, U.S.
    Government critical infrastructure, and the American people. In my own
    engagements with international partners, I will reinforce the
    imperative of protecting sensitive U.S. information from existing and
    future cyber threats.
                            congressional oversight
        Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
    responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
    subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
    timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
    electronic communications, and other information from the executive
    branch.
        Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
    to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
    other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
    yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    provide this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
    of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
    briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
    communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
    to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    consult with this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
    committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
    basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
    reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
    and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
    or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
    Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
    materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
    records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
    information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
    with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
    request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees with records
    and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
    a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
    you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
    this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.
        Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
    ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
    retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
    employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
    subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
    answer with a simple yes or no.
        Answer. Yes.

        [Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
                               axis of aggressors
        1. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, prioritizing our responses to
    threats is sound policy, but we do not get to ignore threats just
    because they are a lower priority. Russia, North Korea, and Iran are
    nuclear armed, or aspiring, adversaries that maintain large
    conventional armies. Most of our allies do not have nuclear weapons.
    Allied defense spending is rapidly increasing, thanks to President
    Trump, but still won't lead to sufficient capability to replace the
    United States in the near-to mid-term. What role should the United
    States play in deterring and defending against these threats?
        Mr. Zimmerman. This is among the most pressing questions facing
    U.S. defense policy. The United States and our allies face multiple,
    serious threats requiring responsible and resolute approaches. In my
    understanding, there is broad consensus that an urgent need exists for
    our allies and partners to step up defense investments and take greater
    ownership of their security needs--and that doing so would advance both
    our interest and theirs. It is encouraging to see some allies and
    partners moving in this direction, and a key role the United States can
    play is to accelerate this trend and get more allies on board. If
    confirmed, I would make this a priority from day one, using ASD(ISA)'s
    role in managing defense relations to spur and steer allies toward
    security investments that strengthen our alliances and enable them to
    lead from the front.
        In Europe, our NATO allies are in some cases expanding defense
    investments, and it seems to me that the United States should encourage
    their increased ability to field combat-credible forces and weapons
    systems that enable them to be primary on conventional deterrence,
    while the United States continues to provide critical and focused
    support, including an extended nuclear deterrent.
        My understanding is that a similar arrangement can and should be
    pursued with respect to threats our East Asian allies face from
    Pyongyang. I have worked in previous roles with our South Korean allies
    on security issues, and I can testify to their capabilities.
        Meanwhile, Iran continues to threaten U.S. interests and our allies
    in the Middle East. The National Security Presidential Memorandum on
    Iran signed on 4 February cogently outlines these threats, and I fully
    support its maximum pressure directives. We have shared security
    interests with allies and partners in the Middle East, and the United
    States can play an effective integrating and enabling role in
    protecting them--especially against threats emanating from Iran and
    terrorist groups. The Abraham Accords afford a model of how the United
    States can foster cooperation among allies and partners that helps
    advance shared security interests.
        These threats are grave and cannot be wished away. Sound U.S.
    defense policy will always deal with the world the way it is, not the
    way we wish it would be. I believe that with an appropriate sense of
    urgency, the approaches briefly outlined here can be pursued in a way
    that makes our alliances stronger and spurs much needed investments in
    both U.S. and our allies' security.
                                 8(a) contracts
        2. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, the Small Business Act (SBA) 8(a)
    program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through which
    sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small businesses
    owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
    Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
    corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
    classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
    earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
    (CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
    rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
    to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
    to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
    Department of the Defense?
        Mr. Zimmerman. This is an area where I would like to become more
    familiar, and if confirmed would commit to work with the Department,
    your office, and Congress to strengthen the 8(a) program to the extent
    to which it falls within the ASD(ISA) portfolio. I appreciate the
    unique value brought to the DOD through programs like 8(a) that are
    known for efficiency and high CPARS marks.

        3. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
    contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
    Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
    mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
    warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
    buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
    flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
    you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
    initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I appreciate the flexibility and efficiency which I
    understand are offered through the 8(a) program. If confirmed, I will
    work to ensure such programs continue to deliver cost-effective
    solutions to the extent that they fall within the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
                                   __________
                  Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
        4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, rapid response capabilities are
    essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
    same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
    our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
    efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
    to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
    and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
    Department of Defense.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Rapid response capabilities are critical for our
    warfighters, and if confirmed I would work to ensure the 8(a) program
    continues to offer a valuable avenue for achieving this through
    flexible, secure, and efficient contracting, to the extent it falls
    within the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
                                     alaska
        5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, on President Trump's first day
    in office, he signed the Executive Order ``Unleashing Alaska's
    Extraordinary Resource Potential.'' This sent a strong message to
    Alaska, America, and the world, that unleashing Alaska's extraordinary
    resources and jobs in a growing economy is one of his Administration's
    top priorities. For years, I've worked toward the success of the Alaska
    LNG project. Not only could Alaska LNG shipments provide our allies
    with energy security, reaching them in 6 days without any strategic
    choke points, but this pipeline crosses directly through some of our
    most prominent military bases in my State, several of which have had
    issues with supply. Now, purchase agreements and other ways to commit
    to the project, beyond just the Department of Defense's (DOD) immediate
    need, will help secure financing for the project quickly and at the
    lowest cost in line with President Trump's America First Energy and
    National Security agenda. Can I get your commitment to work with me on
    the Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project?
        Mr. Zimmerman. As someone who has studied energy security and
    particularly LNG for much of my career, I understand that energy
    security is vital to national security and appreciate your longstanding
    commitment to Alaskan LNG. If confirmed, I commit to working with my
    colleagues across the Department of Defense and you to explore this
    project's opportunities for the DOD and nation.
                           collaboration with israel
        6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, it is U.S. policy to maintain
    and enhance Israel's qualitative military edge (QME)--effectively,
    Israel's ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat or
    potential combination of threats. Given the continuing instability
    among Israel's neighbors and the region overall, this U.S. commitment
    is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, in the past year, some U.S.
    arms sales and deliveries to Israel were delayed or withheld. If
    confirmed, will you make ensuring Israel's QME is maintained a
    priority?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will support the Administration's
    priority to maintain Israel's QME. The Trump Administration, as I
    understand, has already taken steps to lift all holds on U.S. arms
    sales and deliveries to Israel that were held up during the Biden
    Administration. Through bold action to take ownership of and
    responsibility for its security, Israel has modeled behavior I think is
    widely appropriate for our allies.

        7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, for more than 4 decades, Iran
    has served as the primary source of instability and chaos in the Middle
    East. Hamas would not have been able to carry out the attacks of
    October 7 without Iran's support. In Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and
    beyond, Iran has, and continues to, work against American interests.
    Iran today could produce weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear weapon
    in just a week and multiple bombs in under a month. Iranian petroleum
    exports remain at or near levels not seen in more than 6 years,
    providing funding for their terrorist activity. Do you agree Iran must
    be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I agree with the President's stated policy, outlined
    in the 4 February 2025 National Security Presidential Memorandum, that
    Iran can never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

        8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, in your view, what more should
    the United States be doing to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear
    weapon?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I understand that negotiations with Iran are
    underway, and I trust the Administration to pursue an agreement that
    secures U.S. interests and those of our allies, which the JCPOA never
    did. In the meantime, I support the Administration's approach of
    maximum pressure and willingness to keep all tools available to counter
    Iranian aspirations to acquire nuclear weapons and other malign
    behavior. It is the Department of Defense's role to ensure the
    President is armed with the best possible military options, and if
    confirmed I would work to ensure the President has these.
                           u.s. indo-pacific command
        9. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, soft power is a critical tool
    in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) area of responsibility not
    only because it fills host nation investment needs that might otherwise
    be filled by China, but also because it reinforces critical
    infrastructure and deepens ties that would be critical in any future
    conflict in the region. If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing cuts
    to many of these programs and supporting beneficial development
    projects in the Indo-Pacific?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the Department continues to
    prioritize competition with China as our pacing threat, and that the
    fiscal year 2026 budget request reflects this by investing in cutting-
    edge, combat-credible capabilities designed to deter China and maintain
    our competitive edge in the Indo-Pacific, consistent with the
    Administration's peace-through-strength policy. Regarding information
    about specific programs and strategy in the Indo-Pacific, I would defer
    to the Department's office of Indo-Pacific Security Affairs.
                                   __________
                    Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Budd
                             foreign military sales
        10. Senator Budd. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, you will be charged
    with oversight of security cooperation programs and foreign military
    sales (FMS) programs across the Middle East, Europe and Africa. Where
    do you see the biggest bottlenecks in the FMS process and, if
    confirmed, will you commit to working with my office and the Department
    of State to eliminate red tape from this process?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I commit wholeheartedly to working
    with the Department, your office, Congress, and the State Department to
    do all possible from the ASD(ISA) position to enhance the transparency
    and alacrity of the FMS process. As a nominee, I do not yet have
    complete knowledge of the bottlenecks, but if confirmed would make a
    priority of meeting with the relevant stakeholders within DOD, State,
    and Congress to pursue a foreign defense sales system that enables more
    effective and rapid cooperation between the United States and our
    partners, consistent with the Administration's objectives.
                                   __________
                    Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
                             anti-houthi operations
        11. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, in your opening statement you
    assert that the regions included in the International Security Affairs
    role ``must be addressed judiciously and in ways that fully support the
    Department's primary goals of securing the Homeland and deterring
    China.''
        How does waging a military campaign against the Houthis, which has
    required repositioning assets from U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
    (INDOPACOM) and includes more than 1,000 strikes to date with no public
    articulation of the measures of effectiveness, fit into the
    Administration's primary goals of securing the Homeland and deterring
    China?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I do not have complete insight into the recent U.S.
    campaign targeting the Houthis, but my understanding is that it was
    intended to ensure U.S. freedom of navigation at one of the world's key
    maritime chokepoints, the Bab al-Mandeb, including the U.S. Navy's
    ability to move forces between strategic theaters such as U.S. European
    Command (USEUCOM) and USINDOPACOM. I support the President's position
    that the Houthis' attacks were unacceptable and had to end.

        12. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, you have spent your career in the
    intelligence field with a significant portion focused on the Middle
    East. In your opinion, are the Houthis rational actors that can be
    deterred?
        Mr. Zimmerman. While I do not have full details regarding the
    recent agreement, the Houthis' acceptance of U.S. demands and
    commitment to stop attacking U.S. ships seem to suggest a strategic
    calculus responsive to U.S. and partner force projection.
                              allies and partners
        13. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, in our office call you spoke about
    your role, if confirmed, in managing partner and ally relations and the
    importance of trust in those relations. I am heartened to hear this
    will be a priority and I share your view on the absolutely criticality
    of strong alliances built on trust, respect, and predictability. In
    your assessment, would a trade war with our allies that stifles
    economic growth, increases costs, and drives countries away from
    purchasing U.S. defense articles help or hurt your efforts to build
    trust and strengthen alliances?
        Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, the President has been unequivocal in
    maintaining that strong, reciprocal relationships that foster mutual
    economic vitality are in both our interests and those of our allies. On
    the very day of my writing this answer, the White House announced a
    major trade deal with the UK, exemplifying the kind of mutually
    beneficial economic arrangements that, in my understanding, the
    Administration aims to forge with any ally or partner willing to pursue
    them. I anticipate that future such arrangements will serve to deepen
    trust and help facilitate appropriate defense sales to key allies and
    partners.

        14. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe that such economic
    barriers would have a negative impact NATO allies' capacity to invest
    more in their national defense--a goal we all agree is important, and
    which you described as urgent in your answers to the Committee's
    advance policy questions?
        Mr. Zimmerman. There is an urgent need for our NATO allies to
    invest more in defense and take greater ownership of their security
    needs. My understanding is that this objective involves at least two
    major challenges: first, a lack of will among some allies to adequately
    increase defense spending; and second, a lack of defense industrial
    capacity, which limits what new capabilities and weapons our allies can
    acquire. I applaud President Trump for even in his first term
    identifying how important it would be for our NATO allies to boost
    defense spending, which it seems some have begun to do with more
    conviction. If confirmed, I would work diligently to encourage even
    greater defense investment and responsibility from our allies.
                               foreign assistance
        15. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, American security is advanced by
    the development of stable nations that are making progress on social
    development, economic growth, and good governance. Conversely, American
    security is undermined by frail and failing nations where conditions
    foster radicalism, produce refugees, spark insurgency, and provide safe
    havens for terrorists, criminal gangs, and human traffickers. It is
    clear that strategic development assistance is not charity--it is an
    essential, modern tool of U.S. national security.
        Mr. Zimmerman. This Administration's nearly blanket freeze on
    foreign aid and dismantling of United States Agency for International
    Development (USAID) will directly result in regional instability and is
    fundamentally harming to our standing with allies and partners across
    the globe. Our national defense strategy correctly identifies the
    important asymmetric advantage our allies and partners provide us to
    deter Chinese aggression and maintain global stability. Do you agree
    that freezing foreign aid funding and cutting personnel endangers our
    global strategic interests?
        I have not had the appropriate briefings to equip me to provide the
    informed answer this question deserves regarding how best to reform
    U.S. foreign assistance. I support the Administration's efforts to
    review and where necessary realign foreign assistance to promote the
    interests of the American people and to ensure such programs further
    our country's freedom and flourishing.

        16. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, China is eager to fill the void we
    are leaving. Do we risk ceding U.S. influence, including our position
    as ``partner of choice'', by abandoning our allies and foreign aid
    commitments?
        Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, one of the most important duties of the
    ASD(ISA) position is to counter China's attempts to expand its
    influence, especially in Africa and the Middle East. If confirmed, I
    would support Department efforts to review our international
    engagements to ensure they are aligned with America's interests and our
    strategic national security focus on countering China. This will afford
    us opportunities to address China's attempts to undermine U.S.
    interests on a revamped, durable basis. I would anticipate using my
    role in managing defense relations to warn countries about the pitfalls
    of partnering with China.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
                          u.s. force posture in syria
        17. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Zimmerman, I am deeply concerned about our
    lack of engagement in Syria--the Administration has already cut
    essential assistance for chemical weapons monitoring, repatriation of
    Al-Hol residents, and basic needs in the fragile country. Now, the
    Administration is withdrawing our troops that have been critical to the
    fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
        ISIS, Russia, and Iran are all trying to establish themselves in
    Syria right now--they would benefit from our force reductions at this
    critical moment. How will the United States ensure the lasting defeat
    of ISIS without a force presence in Syria?
        Mr. Zimmerman. While my knowledge of the situation on the ground is
    limited given that I am not in the position, my understanding is that
    the Combined Joint Task Force Operation INHERENT RESOLVE is undertaking
    a deliberate and conditions-based consolidation of forces in Syria, not
    a withdrawal. This consolidation has been enabled by success in
    suppressing remnants of ISIS in Syria, primarily through our vetted
    Syrian partners the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Syrian Free
    Army, both of which I understand continue to maintain strong
    counterterrorism pressure on ISIS. I also understand that the
    consolidation does not remove our ability to support these partners
    and, if needed, project power and strike ISIS and other Violent
    Extremist Organizations.
        I agree chemical weapons monitoring is a serious issue. I
    understand that Syria's interim authorities are cooperating with the
    Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. I also understand
    that the fall of the Assad regime has created a pathway for thousands
    of civilians to return to their communities from the Al-Hol camp, or to
    be repatriated to countries such as Iraq through coordination between
    the SDF, the interim authorities, and various humanitarian
    organizations. Iran's influence in Syria has suffered from Assad's
    fall, and the interim authorities do not appear willing for Iran to
    regain a foothold.

        18. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, what is your plan
    to deal with the ISIS fighter population detained by the Syrian
    Democratic Forces?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the Department of Defense
    retains authorities and capabilities to support detention operations in
    Syria and assist in repatriations from northeast Syria. If confirmed, I
    would anticipate helping the Department of Defense support Department
    of State diplomatic efforts to persuade other countries to repatriate
    their detained citizens from Syria, to include as appropriate using the
    Counter Terrorism Train and Equip Fund to provide limited support to
    repatriation operations. With the increased rate of Iraqi repatriations
    from Syria--which represent a large portion of the detainees--it will
    be important to ensure this population is not exploited by ISIS. I
    understand that the SDF is also in negotiations with the Syrian interim
    authorities for long-term plans on how to handle both Syrian detainees
    in a future justice system as well as the detention of any remaining
    international detainees that cannot be repatriated.
                                   __________
                Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
                                     ethics
        19. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
    contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
    as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by all laws and ethics
    rules regarding post-government employment, which include restrictions
    related to acceptance of compensation from defense contractors and
    communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf of future
    employers and clients.

        20. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
    ``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
    consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
    years after leaving DOD?
        Mr. Zimmerman. See response to Question 19, above.

        21. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit not to seek
    employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
    from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
    government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
        Mr. Zimmerman. See response to Question 19, above.

        22. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, during your nomination process,
    did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
    related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I fielded appropriate questions about my policy
    views, but I was not approached about loyalty.

        23. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, Mr. Overbaugh, and Mr. Zimmerman,
    if you were approached about your loyalty to President Trump, did you
    sign a loyalty pledge or other similar oath? If so, please provide a
    copy of the text of that pledge or oath.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable, see response to question #22.

        24. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you were approached about
    your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
    representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable, see response to question #22.

        25. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, in November 2024, the New York
    Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
    adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
    prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
    positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
    joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        26. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you did discuss the
    possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
    Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
    position within the Administration?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        27. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, at any time, did lawyers for
    President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
    regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
    describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
    documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
    information pertaining to this interaction.
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        28. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, were you in contact with Mr.
    Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
    describe the nature of those contacts.
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        29. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, was Mr. Musk present or involved
    in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
    describe the nature of his involvement.
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        30. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
    with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
    indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        31. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, who was in the room or
    participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Throughout my interviews, I interacted with various
    people from the Presidential Personnel Office and the DOD Landing Team.

        32. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you own any stock or hold any
    other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
    to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by the Ethics Agreement I
    signed on April 8, 2025, which has been provided to the Committee.

        33. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what do you consider the role of
    the press in a democracy?
        Mr. Zimmerman. A free press is critical to a free country, as
    enshrined in the First Amendment.

        34. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you think it would be an
    appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
    who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
    administration?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        35. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit not to
    retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
    facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
    articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
    Trump administration?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.

        36. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you requested, or has
    anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party
    sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar
    agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
    capacity?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        37. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you voluntarily release any
    individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
    nomination?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable.

        38. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you ever paid or promised
    to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
    individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
    disparagement, or similar agreement?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        39. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if the answer to the previous
    question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
    were the circumstances?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable.

        40. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to recuse
    yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
    employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by the Ethics Agreement I
    signed on April 8, 2025, which has been provided to the Committee.

        41. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, please provide a list of all
    your clients at Tractor Air LLC within the last 5 years.
        Mr. Zimmerman. This LLC has been inactive for the past 5 years with
    zero clients.
                    congressional oversight and transparency
        42. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
    the role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
    Inspectors General?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the DOD Inspector General
    acts as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense to combat
    waste, fraud, and abuse at the Department, including by conducting
    audits and investigations and communicating with Congress. My
    understanding is that the services' Inspectors General perform similar
    duties for the services.

        43. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you ensure your staff
    complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
    communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
    protected from reprisal for their testimony?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would ensure both compliance with
    Office of the Inspector General deadlines and protection of witnesses
    against retaliation for testimony.

        44. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are not able to comply
    with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
    Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
    for any good faith delay or denial?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would work with the Office of the
    Inspector General to comply with requests in a timely manner. I would
    defer to that office to keep Congress updated regarding its reviews.

        45. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
    including the President?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I do not believe that the President or Secretary
    would issue an unlawful order. If confirmed, I would consistently
    follow the Constitution and laws of the United States.

        46. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what actions would you take if
    you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
    President?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I do not believe that the President or Secretary
    would issue an unlawful order. If confirmed, I would not carry out an
    unlawful order.

        47. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to voluntarily
    provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
    requests with an appropriate deposition.

        48. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to voluntarily
    testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
    requests with appropriate testimony.

        49. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to testify or
    provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
    to do so?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to respond to subpoenas with the
    appropriate testimony or deposition.

        50. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to providing
    information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
    to do so?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
    requests with the appropriate information or documents.

        51. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you provide information or
    documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to respond to subpoenas with the
    appropriate information or documents.

        52. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to following
    current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
    and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
    Services Committees and their minority members?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to being responsive to all such requests
    and inquiries, including from minority.

        53. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, will you commit to
    posting your official calendar monthly?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I commit to complying with the Freedom
    of Information Act, which I understand covers all agency records to
    include my official calendar.

        54. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you think the Federal
    Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
    examples of overclassification you have encountered.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Classified information is essential for national
    security, yet I do believe overclassification presents a real problem.
    Information that does not meet the standards for classification should
    not be classified. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting the
    Secretary in ensuring proper classification and, as needed, would work
    with my intelligence community counterparts to ensure requirements and
    timeframes for safeguarding national security information are
    appropriate and not excessive.

        55. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you think your
    department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
    declassification?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would support using technological
    solutions to increase the speed, accuracy, and consistency of
    declassification reviews.
                                  project 2025
        56. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
    transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        57. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you discussed Project 2025
    with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
    please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
    you discussed it.
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.
                               foreign influence
        58. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you received any payment
    from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
    within the past 5 years?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        59. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you communicated with any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, as part of my official duties as a fellow in
    the Senate and previously in the Intelligence Community.

        60. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, please disclose any
    communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
    foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
    the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
        Mr. Zimmerman. I have received no payment from a representative of
    or entity controlled by a foreign government. Regarding communication,
    I have had multiple engagements with representatives of foreign
    governments (Ambassadors, embassy personnel, etc.) as part of my
    official duties as a fellow in the Senate and previously in the
    Intelligence Community.
                            impoundment control act
        61. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe the Secretary of
    Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block the
    disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I believe the Secretary and every member of the
    executive branch must follow the Constitution and the law related to
    disbursing funds appropriated by Congress.

        62. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act
    is that it provides a framework for handling circumstances in which the
    President seeks to defer or cancel execution of appropriated funds. I
    commit, if confirmed, to execute my responsibilities in a manner
    consistent with the Constitution and the law. My actions and advice on
    this matter would be informed by the Administration's legal positions
    and advice from the Department's General Counsel.

        63. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to complying with
    the Impoundment Control Act?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        64. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to notifying the
    Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
    minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
    Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
    authorizes?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        65. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, the Constitution's Spending
    Clause (Art. I, Sec.  8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
    Sec.  9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
    The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
    that impoundments are constitutional?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        66. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, the funding levels in
    appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
    instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
    stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
    discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        67. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
    the requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes
    and appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress
    deems it to do so?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        68. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to expending the
    money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
    Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        69. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to following and
    implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
    Authorization Act passed into law?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
    responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
    law, including the National Defense Authorization Act. My actions and
    advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter would be informed by
    the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
    General Counsel.

        70. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you became aware of a
    potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
    or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would abide by the Department's
    procedures to report such violations to the appropriate authorities. My
    actions and advice to the Secretary regarding any such violations would
    be informed by the Administration's legal positions and advice from the
    Department's General Counsel.
                            research and development
        71. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, does the Federal Government
    benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers?
        Mr. Zimmerman. The Federal Government can benefit from such
    partnerships that are well-defined and cost-effective. The Federal
    Government has collaborated with colleges, universities, nonprofits,
    and federally funded research centers to use their advanced analytical,
    engineering, and research capabilities and state-of-the-art facilities,
    enhancing our Federal workforce and labs. In the context of the
    Department of Defense, such collaborations can nurture the next
    generation of scientists and engineers, equipping them with the skills
    to tackle tough technical challenges and deliver advanced military
    technologies to our warfighters.

        72. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, under your leadership, will your
    agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
    federally funded research and development centers to research and
    address our toughest national security challenges?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, to the extent they are applicable to
    the ASD(ISA) portfolio, I will support partnerships that bring
    enhancement to our warfighters and defense capabilities.
             protecting classified information and federal records
        73. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
    the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Practicing proper OPSEC is critical to mission
    success and force protection. OPSEC denies adversaries an opportunity
    to gain advantage over U.S. forces.

        74. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what are the national security
    risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
        Mr. Zimmerman. The improper or unauthorized disclosure of
    classified information risks causing identifiable or describable damage
    to national security.'The scope and likelihood of that damage would
    depend on the details of the information released, including the level
    of classification, as well as the extent and nature of the disclosure.?

        75. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what would you do if you learned
    an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I would follow the security protocols governing that
    disclosure. If confirmed, I commit to adhering to the information and
    security policies of the Department and will ensure all of those who
    work for me do the same.

        76. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
    government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
        Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will adhere to the Federal Records
    Act and applicable DOD policies, which ensure that the Federal records
    I create or receive are appropriately maintained.

        77. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, should classified information be
    shared on unclassified commercial systems?
        Mr. Zimmerman. As per the DOD's Information Security Program, only
    computers and IT systems approved and accredited for Classified
    National Security Information may be used for classified
    communications.
                   retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
        78. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe that
    servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
    protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
    illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
    any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I believe that all whistleblowers should be
    protected consistent with the law.

        79. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you ever retaliated against
    any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
    assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
    that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Zimmerman. No.

        80. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
    do so.
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
    whistleblowers in accordance with applicable laws. As appropriate, I
    would work with the General Counsel of the Department to ensure
    compliance with these laws throughout the process.

        81. Senator Warren. Mr.. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
    commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
    forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
    negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
    whistleblowers in accordance with applicable laws.

        82. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
    advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
    their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
    decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
    protected activity?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that each of those actions could
    amount to an act of retaliation, depending on the circumstances.

        83. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you consider it to be
    retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
    prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
    individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
    actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
    to that individual engaging in protected activity?
        Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that each of those actions could
    amount to an act of retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
                                   __________
                 Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Duckworth
                         politicization of the military
        84. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you commit
    not to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers
    for executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.
                         strategic role of foreign aid
        85. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, what is the role and value of
    foreign aid in supporting military operations and regional stability,
    particularly in Africa, the Middle East, and the Western Hemisphere?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I have not had the briefings or access to provide an
    informed assessment on the Administration's reform of foreign aid. I
    believe that in some circumstances foreign aid can help reduce risk,
    and I support efforts to ensure that such aid is tied to advancing
    American interests, takes into account our highest-priority threats,
    and aligns with our national security strategy.

        86. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, how will you navigate
    security cooperation with countries that may now turn to China for
    critical aid due to cuts to U.S. foreign assistance, especially in
    Africa?
        Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, one of the most important duties of the
    ASD(ISA) position is to counter China's attempts to expand its
    influence, especially in Africa and the Middle East. If confirmed, I
    would support Department efforts to review our international
    engagements to ensure they are aligned with America's interests and our
    strategic national security focus on countering China. This will afford
    us opportunities to address China's attempts to undermine U.S.
    interests on a revamped, durable basis. I would anticipate using my
    role in managing defense relations to warn countries about the pitfalls
    of partnering with China and motivate them toward mutually beneficial
    collaboration with the United States.
                           military command structure
        87. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, press reports indicate that
    the Trump administration is considering plans to combine U.S. Africa
    Command (AFRICOM) under U.S. European Command (EUCOM). If confirmed, do
    you commit to consulting with this committee before recommending any
    change to these two commands?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I am not aware of a DOD plan to combine these
    commands. If asked to weigh in on any such discussion, I would
    carefully review all requirements, consult relevant stakeholders, and
    engage with SASC as part of the process. My recommendations would be
    guided by the Administration's America first, peace through strength
    agenda.

        88. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, do you have any concerns
    about how this might impact U.S. strategic focus in Africa?
        Mr. Zimmerman. I am not aware of a DOD plan to combine these
    commands. I am not currently in a position to make a fully informed
    analysis of the pros and cons of doing so.

        89. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, press reports indicate that
    the Trump administration is considering relinquishing the NATO Supreme
    Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) position. If confirmed, do you commit
    to consulting with this committee before recommending any change to
    this construct?
        Mr. Zimmerman. It is my understanding that the Department of
    Defense is not considering relinquishing the SACEUR position at this
    time. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have both made clear that
    the United States is not abandoning our European allies. I understand
    that the Secretary is currently performing a review of U.S. global
    force posture. If confirmed, I commit to provide my best advice to that
    review and to engage in all appropriate consultation with SASC.
                            unauthorized disclosures
        90. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you commit
    that your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
    official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
    both oversight and institutional memory?
        Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.
                                     ______

        [The nomination reference of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman
    follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The biographical sketch of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman, which
    was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
    referred, follows:]

       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                           ______

        [The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
    nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
    requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
    form that details the biographical, financial, and other
    information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Daniel L.
    Zimmerman in connection with his nomination follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
    questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
    the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
    are contained in the committee's executive files.]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        [The nomination of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman was reported to
    the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
    recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
    was confirmed by the Senate on June 24, 2025.]

                                     [all]